Upon hearing the proposal of PFP Legislator Tsao Yuan-jhang (
Tsao was reported as saying that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait hold common ground on the issue of the Tiaoyutai Islands. How can that possibly be? The response of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs was that the islands are part of "Chinese territory." In contrast, the position of the Taiwan government is that the islands belong to the ROC. If the Taiwan government was right, then the only way these islands could also be part of "Chinese territory" would be that both they and Taiwan are Chinese territory -- that is simply untrue.
The ROC government on Taiwan has every right to assert claims over these islands on its own without conceding with respect to the Chinese sovereignty issue. After all, historical records dating as far back as the 1500's to the more recent post-WWII era consistently indicate that these islands have always been treated as accessories to Taiwan. Their disposition was usually treated as a side dish to the disposition of Taiwan. For example, in 1895, after the first Sino-Japanese War, China had ceded both Taiwan and these islands to Japan. In 1940, a jurisdictional dispute had arisen between Taiwan, then still a Japanese colony, and Okinawa over the Tiaoyutai Islands. A Tokyo court ruled in favor of Taiwan at the time. After WWII, again Japan handed over both Taiwan and these islands to the ROC government.
Under the circumstances, the Taiwan government is fully justified in its claim that the Tiaoyutais belong to whomever has a rightful claim over Taiwan. Since the ROC on Taiwan is an independent sovereign country, the Tiaoyutai Islands are obviously part of its sovereign territory.
Reportedly, many pan-blue lawmakers are pushing the government to send troops over to these islands. This is definitely out of the question. For one, thus far, Japan has not taken any military action. It would be highly dangerous and inappropriate to escalate the situation to that level. This is not to mention the fact that any military conflict or even tension between Taiwan and Japan over these islands may just give China an excuse and the golden opportunity for military intervention followed by a military takeover of Taiwan.
It is really funny to hear to some members of the pro-unification camp saying that if no military action is taken against Japan today, tomorrow it may take it upon itself to invade Taiwan. Between China and Japan, China is by far the greater military threat. No matter how much Japan may lust for any oil deposits that may be on or near the Tiaoyutais, it cannot possibly have the slightest interest about taking over Taiwan. For one, it will first have to deal with China, which wants Taiwan for itself, and the US.
The Taiwan government is absolutely right in saying that the matter must be dealt with through diplomatic channels and means. There is no point in acting in haste. After all, Taiwan has a much bigger enemy -- China -- lurking behind its back.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
After “Operation Absolute Resolve” to capture former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, the US joined Israel on Saturday last week in launching “Operation Epic Fury” to remove Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his theocratic regime leadership team. The two blitzes are widely believed to be a prelude to US President Donald Trump changing the geopolitical landscape in the Indo-Pacific region, targeting China’s rise. In the National Security Strategic report released in December last year, the Trump administration made it clear that the US would focus on “restoring American pre-eminence in the Western hemisphere,” and “competing with China economically and militarily
RSS