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be a disaster in which an ugly but relatively powerless regime, posing no threat to anyone except its own people, has been replaced by a terrorists' playground with the potential to set the entire Middle East aflame.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.
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry