With unseemly haste, the government announced yesterday that Taiwan had not received any US request to send marines to Iraq. Nor, it added, had it any intention of doing so.
We cannot help but think that this addition was unfortunate. Of course we can understand why it was given: Iraq is a hornets' nest that nobody in their right mind wants to go anywhere near.
Anglo-American intervention in that country was illegal under international law and has proved to be a disaster in which an ugly but relatively powerless regime, posing no threat to anyone except its own people, has been replaced by a terrorists' playground with the potential to set the entire Middle East aflame.
Why would Taiwan want any part of this? As one commentator said to this newspaper on Saturday night, "What Taiwanese soldier, or soldier's family, is going to support troops being sent to Iraq after seeing the horror of the Berg video?" This comment probably reflects mainstream opinion.
There also is concern that Taiwan might -- almost certainly would, in fact -- become a terrorist target. We have seen how al-Qaeda likes to nibble at the edge of the occupying coalition. They might not be able to push the US or the British out, but an atrocity here and there can deter the bit-part players, as we saw from the Madrid train bombing. Probably the Poles or the Japanese will be next. Does Taiwan, where security is a joke -- March 19 surely taught us that much -- want to find itself in this coalition of the vulnerable?
The interesting thing about such prudential considerations is that while they are perfectly sensible, indeed compelling, as far as any individual Taiwanese goes, they do not necessarily represent the national interest.
It might seem contradictory to suggest that something might be bad for Taiwanese but good for Taiwan, but nations have to have a longer view than the immediate self-interest of their citizens. Indeed, leadership is often about persuading people to take the difficult but ultimately more fruitful option.
So why should Taiwan help out in Iraq? Why should it, at the very least, refrain from closing out a US request before it is even made? Simply because Taiwan owes its existence as an independent polity to US intervention and subsequent US support.
To a very great degree, Taiwan and its people are able to make plans for the future because of the Taiwan Relations Act. Surely it ill becomes them to shelter under this umbrella without being willing to offer their most powerful ally something in return. Peaceniks might riposte that Taiwan is willing to offer money and expertise. To which we can only say that it is not money or expertise that America needs, but boots on the ground.
We are further baffled by the government spokesman's remark yesterday that "to send troops to Iraq would mean raising our military ties with the US to the level of a quasi-military alliance. We have no such plans now." But isn't this kind of military relationship exactly what Taiwan has long wanted?
And here is another consideration: US President George W. Bush, whatever might be thought of his wider foreign policy, has been a good friend to Taiwan. Almost certainly John Kerry will be no such thing. Those who remember the Clinton administration's Taiwan policy have to view a Democrat in the White House with alarm.
Furthermore, whoever wins in November, the Iraq quagmire has surely blunted America's appetite for foreign adventures for some time to come. Such factors are likely to result in a weakening of resolve in keeping China at bay.
So when Taiwan has to call on US help, it would be in its interest to be able to call in a very large favor.
As India’s six-week-long general election grinds past the halfway mark, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s messaging has shifted from confident to shrill. After the first couple of phases of polling showed a 3 percentage point drop in turnout, Modi and his party leaders have largely stopped promoting their accomplishments of the past 10 years — or, for that matter, the “Modi guarantees” offered in the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) manifesto for the next five. Instead, making the majority Hindu population fear and loathe Muslims seems to be the BJP’s preferred talking point. Modi went on the offensive in an April 21
As Ukraine leads the global fight for democracy, Taiwan, facing a potential war with China, should draw lessons from Ukraine’s cyberwarfare success. Taiwan has been enhancing its arsenal with advanced weapons from the West in anticipation of a possible full-scale invasion. However, Taipei should also consider Ukraine’s effective digital warfare, notably the “IT [information technology] Army,” a decentralized force instrumental in Kyiv’s cybercampaigns. In February 2022, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine marked the onset of a significant cyberwar, where fears of a “digital Pearl Harbor” in Ukraine were unmet, thanks to robust cyberdefenses backed by Western public and private support. This led
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is attempting to create an alternative international world order to the US-dominated model. China has benefited hugely from the current order since former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) opened up its economy five decades ago. Countries can be categorized as continental or maritime, and to a great degree this determines their optimum foreign policy. China is continental, as is Russia. The US initially followed a continental foreign policy, before it settled on a maritime model. The British empire was so successful because a tiny island kingdom built a formidable naval presence. The US-dominated world order, stabilized by
With the addition this year of Sweden and last year Finland to NATO, the Baltic Sea has been dubbed a “NATO lake” by some analysts. A glance at a map shows that is largely (but not completely) true — the coastline has a couple of slivers of Russian territory. The rest of the coastal littoral is in NATO hands: Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Germany and Denmark. Russia controls a bit of coast between Lithuania and Poland because of its strange enclave of Kaliningrad. Russian President Vladimir Putin remains in control of the far eastern corner of the Baltic Sea