Almost 10 years after the "US-Japan Joint Declaration on Security" was issued in 1996, a meeting of the foreign and defense ministers of these two countries was held in Washington on Feb. 19.
The latest ministerial talks between Japan and the US took the initiative to respond to Beijing's "anti-secession law" by announcing the most significant change to the two countries' security alliance in a decade: Japan joined the Bush administration in identifying security in the Taiwan strait as a "common strategic objective."
The Japanese government even brought its ambiguous "emergency defense plan in its surrounding area" to an end.
Japanese foreign ministry spokesman Hatsuhisa Takashima pointed out in a press conference after the meeting that the US-Japan joint declaration on security will include not only Japan, but also the Korean Peninsula, Taiwan and the northern Pacific Ocean.
Takashima then emphasized that the declaration was jointly drafted by the US and Japan without any pressure from a third party.
From Takashima's statement, the US and Japan have reached a "tacit" consensus on cross-strait issues.
The significance of the US-Japan security alliance lies not only in its reaction to Beijing's "anti-secession law," but more importantly, it directly rebuked Beijing for its threats to use force against Taiwan and indirectly rejected China's one-sided claim of sovereignty over Taiwan.
If these assumptions were false, why would China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs react by publicly announcing that it opposes interference by the US and Japan in China's internal affairs?
China regards the Taiwan issue as a domestic affair, and the US and Japan, on the other hand, regard cross-strait security as a joint security concern. The problem cannot be expressed more clearly.
This is a complete embodiment of the internationalization of cross-strait security. Before Beijing has even implemented its "anti-secession law," the US and Japan have taken one step further by using this joint declaration to counterbalance it. Therefore, the Beijing government should really give its cross-strait policies a thorough review.
The people of Taiwan welcome the joint declaration on security, and China's anger tells more than half the story. Interestingly, Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said that the declaration holds both advantages and disadvantages for Taiwan.
The advantages are too obvious to mention, but what are the disadvantages?
Ma did not give details, but according to some lawmakers of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) quoted in the local Chinese-language media, Ma is concerned that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and pro-independence groups might harbor a false belief that Taiwan has won Japan's protection. Therefore, we can deduce that Ma believes that the cross-strait issue should be resolved by China and Taiwan, without the intervention of a third party.
Why do Ma and the opposition parties advocate that Taiwan should not be supported by the international community?
Why would Japan's protection of Taiwan be "advantageous" to the DPP and pro-independence groups? The reason is that the DPP has managed to stay in power, while the KMT-PFP alliance has failed to regain power.
Chin Heng-wei is editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under