Monday marked the inauguration of US President Donald Trump, officially making him the 47th US president. In his highly anticipated inaugural address, Trump — for the most part — did not directly address issues of international diplomacy, nor did he discuss topics such as the Ukraine war in Europe, the Israel-Hamas war in the Middle East or Taiwan’s national security. He instead focused on US domestic issues and emphasized his goal of “making America great again.” The underlying reason for this is that Trump wanted to reassure his supporters and convey to them that he would fulfill his campaign promises. Thus, he focused primarily on immigration and border security policies — after all, those were the key factors that led to his election victory.
Throughout his address, Trump maintained his characteristic style of speaking, using simple phrases and accessible vocabulary to win support from the public. However, there might actually be a larger strategy behind his language. Trump made global news earlier this month with his shocking remarks about the US potentially annexing Canada as its 51st state and purchasing Greenland. However, in his inaugural address, he only referred to the Panama Canal as a target.
He did not specifically bring up the issue of trade tariffs with China. However, just hours after the address, he declared his intent to impose 25 percent tariffs on products from Canada and Mexico beginning on Feb. 1. It was not until one day later, on Tuesday evening, that he announced an additional 10 percent tariff on Chinese imports to be implemented on the same date. This apparent strategy of befriending distant states while attacking US neighbors has led some to wonder — did last week’s phone call between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) have any influence on these decisions?
Trump and Xi’s diplomatic interactions might still revolve around navigating the principles of dialogue, confrontation and war preparation. In Monday’s address, Trump mentioned revitalizing the US automobile industry, increasing reliance on oil and revoking tax credits for electric vehicles (EV) — measures that could very well be aimed at countering China’s price advantage in the EV market.
His decision to designate drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations is likely linked to policies countering fentanyl — the supply of which he said China is largely responsible for — as well as negotiations with Beijing on drug-related issues. These moves suggest that, although Trump did not directly mention US-China interactions in his inaugural address, he would very likely shift his focus back to China and the Indo-Pacific region once the situations in Europe and the Middle East settle down. This could be the direction of the next phase of his international strategy.
It is unlikely that Taiwan could significantly influence upcoming US-China interactions. This is especially true when dealing with Trump — a president who is firm in his beliefs, unrelenting in his policy leadership and has a tendency to use Washington as his own personal Hollywood. Aside from listening carefully to his words and observing his actions, it would be unwise for Taiwan to react impulsively to Trump’s exaggerated remarks. Only by exhibiting strategic determination, maintaining positive relationships with US think tanks and other relevant organizations, and planning proactively could our country secure an advantageous position.
Lin Ying-yu is an assistant professor at Tamkang University’s Graduate Institute of International Affairs and Strategic Studies.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS