Who would we prefer to win the US presidential election? If it seems presumptuous on our part to state a preference, let us point out that Taiwan has owed its security, and as a result its economic miracle and resultant prosperity, to a US military shield put in place five decades ago by President Harry Truman. The maintenance of that shield is Taiwan's most vital strategic interest. And yet the robust US response to China's "missile diplomacy" in 1996 has not proved reassuring.
The problem is that whereas China's missile intimidation was a foolish piece of military adventurism, it was an extraordinarily fruitful piece of diplomacy. Having nearly wrecked its relationship with the US, something on which its economy was and is utterly dependent, nevertheless it was the US which was forced to pay a price for putting relations back on track -- which means having the right to sign agreements with China that Beijing has no intention of keeping. This was achieved in the form of Bill Clinton giving voice to the "three no's" on his visit to China in 1998, which shifted the US position from passively tolerating to supporting China's claim to Taiwan.
Any American might ask, of course, why defending Taiwan is in their national interest. Surely a better relationship with a nuclear-armed China has to take priority. A question to which Taiwanese have few answers except the obvious one of pointing out that after decades of exhortation they have evolved into exactly the kind of healthy democracy that the US wants to spread around the world, and it would do that project little good to make the kind of society that Taiwan has become expendable to appease the despots in Beijing. Appeasement doesn't work.
Which of the two US candidates is more likely to remember this when China gets rough? Frankly, we can't tell. Al Gore has all the dubious baggage of association with the Clinton regime and its toadying to China -- all the more ironic since cuddling up to the butchers in Beijing was a useful weapon in Governor Clinton's arsenal against George W. Bush's father back in 1992. But then that father's influence over George W. is likely to make itself felt, especially in foreign policy, something that hardly bodes well for Taiwan either.
Both candidates were reported in Taiwan media yesterday as giving their support to the "one China" doctrine. Gore has said that he would make sure Taiwan had the means to defend itself and would take any threat to Taiwan as a serious threat to the region. Bush has said that the US would not help Taiwan in any conflict if it was provoked by Taiwan, but in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act, would not stand idly by if China were to start a war with Taiwan.
Taken at face value, Gore seems to be the better bet if he keeps his promise about weapons. After all, getting the US to stop supplying Taiwan with arms is the primary goal of China's current Taiwan policy. And Bush's remarks about conflict "provoked by Taiwan" are chilling, seeming, as they do, to preclude any further manifestation by Taiwan of its independent sovereignty.
Either candidate, should he become president, has, however, more to think about than policy toward Taiwan, which means day-to-day the topic will fall into the hands of that permanent foreign policy establishment that rotates between the think tanks, academia and government service and which has, for so long, spoken with a resolutely pro-China pro-appeasement, anti-Taiwan, anti-democratic stance. This of course means a kind of malign neglect of Taiwan until the next crisis. And then, who will come down harder? Who knows? And God willing, let us hope we do not have to find out.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers