“There can be no doubt but that the eventual fate of Formosa largely rests with the US. Unless the US’ political-military strategic position in the Far East is to be abandoned, it is obvious that the time must come in the foreseeable future when a line must be drawn beyond which Communist expansion will be stopped,” reads the memorandum of conversation by then-US ambassador-at-large Philip C. Jessup in 1950.
At the annual Ketagalan Forum on Aug. 8, former US ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley emphasized the importance of the US standing by its allies, especially against global threats from authoritarian regimes such as China. She warned against isolationism and the need for “moral clarity” in supporting Taiwan and highlighted Taiwan’s strategic importance in the Indo-Pacific region. Haley also called for stronger international backing for Taiwan, including its full membership in the UN. Her remarks echoed Jessup’s memorandum, which advocated for active US engagement in Asia to counter regional threats and the expansion of communism.
In the early 1950s, East Asia was undergoing dramatic geopolitical shifts. The Chinese Civil War had concluded in 1949 with the Communist Party establishing the People’s Republic of China (PRC), while the Nationalist government relocated to Taiwan, where they continued to govern the Republic of China (ROC). US policy during this period was one of cautious non-intervention, partly due to a desire to avoid further entanglement in Asian conflicts following World War II.
However, on June 25, 1950, North Korea invaded South Korea, forcing a re-evaluation of US strategy in Asia. On the same day, Jessup penned a critical “memorandum of conversation,” intended for senior US officials, including those in the US Department of State, US Department of Defense and then-US president Harry S. Truman. While the memorandum primarily addressed the US’ response to the Korean War, its implications extended far beyond Korea, particularly concerning Taiwan.
The Korean War, seen as part of a broader communist strategy to expand influence in Asia, underscored Taiwan’s critical role in US strategic calculations. The aggressive move by North Korea, backed by the Soviet Union and implicitly supported by China, raised alarms about the possibility of further communist expansion. Taiwan was particularly vulnerable, and its fall would have had significant repercussions for the balance of power in Asia.
Jessup’s memorandum underscored Taiwan’s strategic importance in the Cold War, highlighting the necessity of US involvement in Asia to counter communist expansion. While the memorandum initially focused on the Korean conflict, it also emphasized Taiwan’s crucial role in regional security — a role which remains relevant today. The Korean War was a catalyst solidifying Taiwan’s place in US defense strategy and a key element in the policy of aimed at curbing communist influence and maintaining balance in Asia.
Haley’s statements during her Taiwan visit echo this strategic thinking, emphasizing the importance of the US and its allies in opposing Chinese aggression and countering authoritarian regimes that threaten global stability. Her call for stronger alliances and proactive measures reflects the same principles that guided US actions in the post-World War II era.
More than 75 years since the end of the Korean War, the strategic dilemmas faced by US policymakers in 1950 remain strikingly relevant. Taiwan’s position as a key player in the Indo-Pacific region and its significance in US-China relations also mirror the concerns outlined in Jessup’s memorandum.
Russia’s war in Ukraine coupled with the China-Russia alliance has reignited Cold War fears, with new blocs forming between free nations and authoritarian regimes. On one side stand Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and their allies. On the other, the US, Japan, the EU, NATO, Taiwan, Australia and South Korea.
During the original Cold War, the primary focus was on the Soviet Union, with the PRC playing a secondary role. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia’s threat diminished. Today, the PRC has emerged as the primary threat to global stability, with Russia’s war in Ukraine elevating it to the second-most pressing threat. This dynamic mirrors the bloc formations of the Cold War era and underscores Taiwan’s strategic importance, which remains a crucial aspect of US foreign policy.
Just as it was crucial 75 years ago for the US and its allies to prevent the fall of South Korea to contain communism, the same is true for Taiwan today in countering authoritarian expansion. Its security is not just a regional issue, but is also a critical component of global stability, making it imperative for the US and its allies to stand firm in their support.
Antonio Graceffo, a China economic analyst who holds a China MBA from Shanghai Jiaotong University, studies national defense at the American Military University in West Virginia.
It is almost three years since Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin declared a friendship with “no limits” — weeks before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Since then, they have retreated from such rhetorical enthusiasm. The “no limits” language was quickly dumped, probably at Beijing’s behest. When Putin visited China in May last year, he said that he and his counterpart were “as close as brothers.” Xi more coolly called the Russian president “a good friend and a good neighbor.” China has conspicuously not reciprocated Putin’s description of it as an ally. Yet the partnership
The ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu (孫子) said “know yourself and know your enemy and you will win a hundred battles.” Applied in our times, Taiwanese should know themselves and know the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) so that Taiwan will win a hundred battles and hopefully, deter the CCP. Taiwanese receive information daily about the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) threat from the Ministry of National Defense and news sources. One area that needs better understanding is which forces would the People’s Republic of China (PRC) use to impose martial law and what would be the consequences for living under PRC
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) said that he expects this year to be a year of “peace.” However, this is ironic given the actions of some KMT legislators and politicians. To push forward several amendments, they went against the principles of legislation such as substantive deliberation, and even tried to remove obstacles with violence during the third readings of the bills. Chu says that the KMT represents the public interest, accusing President William Lai (賴清德) and the Democratic Progressive Party of fighting against the opposition. After pushing through the amendments, the KMT caucus demanded that Legislative Speaker
Beijing’s approval of a controversial mega-dam in the lower reaches of the Yarlung Tsangpo River — which flows from Tibet — has ignited widespread debate over its strategic and environmental implications. The project exacerbates the complexities of India-China relations, and underscores Beijing’s push for hydropower dominance and potential weaponization of water against India. India and China are caught in a protracted territorial dispute along the Line of Actual Control. The approval of a dam on a transboundary river adds another layer to an already strained bilateral relationship, making dialogue and trust-building even more challenging, especially given that the two Asian
RSS