An important indication that the US is worried about China's incursions into the Asia-Pacific region is the inroads it has made into Australia. Australia is probably the US' most trusted ally and has been for a long time. During his recent US visit, Australian Prime Minister John Howard sought to reaffirm the two countries' close relationship. The US appears satisfied.
But of late Canberra has been seeking to recover some political flexibility in its relations with China. Australia's Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, for instance, said in Beijing a while ago that its security alliance with the US (the ANZUS Treaty) didn't apply to Taiwan. In other words, Canberra wouldn't necessarily follow the US in any military conflict with China.
Howard has been more diplomatic, though. When asked, he dismisses as hypothetical the prospect of a conflict over Taiwan and hence not worthy of a response. He reportedly said in Washington that he didn't feel "the least bit squeezed" between the US and China over their rising military and economic rivalry. Indeed, he is optimistic on Sino-US relations.
He was, however, duly critical of Major General Zhu Chenghu's(朱成虎) comments about raining nuclear weapons on US cities if Washington got involved in any military conflict over Taiwan. But Howard also said (and it would be appreciated in Beijing) that, "... I am sure they don't represent the views of the Chinese government."
It doesn't mean Howard had some privileged information from Beijing in this regard. As might be recalled, Zhu had said, when making his nuclear threat, that it was his personal opinion. He was thus leaving the door open for his government to dissociate itself from his "personal" remarks.
Which they did when China's Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing(李肇星) said that his country would not be the first to use nuclear weapons "at any time and under any condition." But it took them a while to do that and that too after widespread international criticism. The point, though, is that nobody, much less a serving army general, has the luxury of a personal opinion for public consumption in a country like China. Apparently, he cleared it with the top authorities before airing his "personal" opinion in front of the media.
Was he testing the waters for US reaction? Did he think that that this would further frighten the world into putting pressure on the US to stay out of the Taiwan situation? It could even send an apocalyptic message to Taiwan to surrender before it was too late. My guess is it is a little bit of all of the above and possibly more. But the most worrying thing is that the nuclear threat is being openly canvassed as a possible choice.
Returning to Australia as a barometer of US concern, the subtle differences between the two countries in their approaches on China are all too apparent. Howard, for instance, was confident that China would remain a benign power and cautioned against being "obsessed" with its strategic threat. He said, "I have a more optimistic view about the relationship between China and the US and I know that the leadership of both countries understand the importance of common sense in relation to Taiwan."
US President George W. Bush, on the other hand, has described the relationship with China as "complicated," with problems looming over a range of issues. Australia would rather focus on expanding trade with China, without bothering about human rights and political freedom.
Bush urged Australia to "work together [with the US] to reinforce the need for China to accept certain values as universal -- the value of minority rights, the value of freedom for people to speak, the value of freedom of religion, the same values we share."
This is not to suggest that Australia is veering away from its close political and security relationship with the US. The suggestion, though, is that if a close ally like Australia can start exercising political flexibility on issues like human rights, democracy and the defense of Taiwan, it is no wonder that other Asia-Pacific countries are also making a beeline to China's side.
Another important barometer of US concern over China is the emerging East Asian community, which seeks to exclude the US from its membership. In the 1990s when the then Malaysian prime minister Mohammed Mahathir mooted the idea of an East Asia caucus (without the US), it failed to take on.
Malaysia has again taken the initiative (with China's blessing and encouragement) to form an East Asian community. The timing seems right, with China now increasingly seen as the rising power in the region. The US won't be invited to the Kuala Lumpur summit of its intended members scheduled for mid-December.
The proposed East Asian community will comprise ASEAN members (the core group) plus China, Japan, South Korea, India, New Zealand and Australia, now that it has agreed to sign the ASEAN non-aggression pact -- the Treaty of Amity and Co-operation. The only consolation for the US is that the proposed East Asian community will have among its mem-bers allies like Japan and Australia to counterbalance China.
Washington is not sitting by idly, though. It has floated a forum of its key allies to deliberate on China's rise and the potential threat it might pose. The Halibut Group, as it is called, reportedly includes the US, Japan, Britain, Canada and New Zealand. Australia had initially refused to join for fear of offending China. But, apparently under pressure from Washington during Prime Minister Howard's US visit, it might also join the line-up.
The exact nature of the new, as yet informal group, is not yet known. But it springs from the US' concern about China's increasing power.
US worry on this account is reflected clearly in the Pentagon's annual report. Washington is concerned that China's growing military power is now both a threat to US security interests and the Asia-Pacific region. As the report says, "Some of China's military planners are surveying the strategic landscape beyond Taiwan."
In other words, they are not just targeting Taiwan but their ambitions are regional, even global.
Sushil Seth is a writer based in Australia.
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