During the summit between US President George W. Bush and Chinese President Jiang Zemin (江澤民), Jiang proposed the removal of missiles from the Taiwan Strait in exchange for a decrease in arms sales to Taipei. Although Bush disarmed him simply by saying, "We are not that naive," the repercussions are still reverberating. What's more, according to former US State Department officials, the ball may soon be knocked into Tai-wan's court, where it could become hard to play.
Beijing's security policies have become more adaptable and flexible in recent years, mainly because those policies are still centered on "stabilizing the periphery and developing the economy." This is to highlight the fact that China is attempting the mature handling of international issues to show that it is sensible and capable of cooperation. We outline below, on the basis of Jiang's reasoning, a number of issues that arise from his offer and the responses that we would recommend.
First, it may have been a propaganda exercise to test the reactions of US and international media. China used the format and location of the APEC summit in Mexico to propose this way of reducing the risk of a military stand-off. It could be said that guided missiles have a high propaganda value and Jiang's proposal naturally provides several advantages in terms of public opinion.
To this, Minister of Foreign Affairs Eugene Chien (簡又新) used the analogy of "apples and oranges," saying that China's "missiles for arms sales" proposal is not a balanced one. There is some truth to this statement and the Ministry of National Defense believes that China's verbal goodwill is of no substantive value, but debate on the matter continues. To ensure that Taipei's point of view is heard, the two ministries should intensify their discussion on measures that could make for a good balance, in terms of both propaganda and substance.
Second, it is worth watching to see if Washington's China policies are changing. When the Bush administration took office, its statements and policies were clearly biased toward Taiwan, but this situation changed after the Sept. 11 attacks. The main reason was that terrorist activities had become a real threat to the US and so it became important to win China's cooperation.
Of course, from a strategic point of view, even if deals are made under the table between Beijing and Washington, the US cannot accept unequal deals like Jiang's "missiles for arms sales" offer. The problem is, however, that if Taiwan cannot propose a constructive response, US strategy in the Taiwan Strait will tip toward the other side, marginalizing Taipei.
Finally, China may have been proposing to adopt formal disarmament measures controlling the total number of missiles, perhaps even destroying them. Of course, it is employing diplomatic pressure, military threats and economic unification against Taiwan, objectives which this possibility would not appear to serve. But if China really were to disarm along the Taiwan Strait, Taipei could consider responding by means of declarations or track-two dialogue in an attempt to put an early end to the arms race.
It may be that the future will see a never-ending stream of more flexible policies from Beijing. For Taiwan, Jiang's offer provides a lesson in realism. Only with the close integration of national security, national defense, diplomacy and the China affairs network will an effective national security team be developed, with the ability to generate comprehensive strategies to meet the range of challenges that Taiwan faces on these fronts.
Lee Wen-chung is a DPP legislator and Su Tzu-yun is a researcher in the DPP Policy Research and Coordinating Committee.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.
RSS