The director of the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Edward Ross, on Monday issued a blunt warning on Taiwan's blocked arms-procurement bill, saying that in terms of its Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), the US is under no obligation to help Taiwan deter a military threat in the Strait if it believes that Taiwan has not fulfilled its unwritten obligation to ensure its own viable self-defense.
The US' comments to Taiwan have evolved from statements of support and appreciation into complaints, and now into clear words of warning.
The latest rhetoric from senior Pentagon officials shows that the US has changed its policy of communicating with the Democratic Progressive Party administration to making appeals to the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and People First Party, and now to directly addressing the people of Taiwan, urging them to have the determination to defend themselves and hold their lawmakers accountable for their actions.
Without doubt, the Bush administration seems to have grown rather disappointed, frustrated and discontented with politicians in Taiwan on the self-defense issue. As Ross forthrightly put it: The special budget for the arms-procurement plan has become a "political football" in the field of Taiwan's domestic politics, and that "this battered ball has been kept in play more to entertain the players -- the politicians -- than to serve the real needs of Taiwan."
Can you blame the US? Even Taiwan's friends in the US Congress are asking why the US should risk the lives of its young men and women to defend Taiwan, which seems to be reluctant to invest in its own defense.
Despite China's substantial military build-up in recent years, Taiwan's defense budget has been declining for the past 10 years. And then the legislature's pan-blue dominated Procedure Committee on Tuesday yet again rejected the arms-procurement bill, marking the 29th time Taiwan has said "No" to the package of eight diesel-electric submarines, 12 P3 surveillance planes and advanced Patriot missile defense systems which the US had approved in 2001.
What impression is Taiwan creating with these 29 rejections? That it is unwilling to invest in its own defense, but regards the TRA as a blank check issued by the US to defend it? Or that it is simply so stupid as to be oblivious to the military threat posed by its vicious, giant neighbor? The latest rejection of the arms-procurement plan must seem like encouragement to China in its aggression toward Taiwan.
Some in Taiwan argue that Taiwan can never match the spending of China, the emerging military giant -- so why try? Such a mindset demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of the military. The military exists to deter attacks. It deters attacks by providing a credible defense capability.
It is frustrating enough to see Taiwan being locked in a diplomatically disadvantageous position on the international stage, but it is even more terrifying to see senseless domestic politics making Taiwan's national defense one of the nation's weaknesses.
All politicians, regardless of party affiliations, ought to ask themselves and examine their hearts about what they have done to substantively promote Taiwan's national defense. Taiwan possesses no offensive capability against China. Are they going to let the nation lose even the most basic minimum requirement -- a capacity to at least deter threats?
It is time for all the people of Taiwan to reach a consensus on national security and show the US that Taiwan is no coward, nor a baby that knows only how to cry for help but refuses to help itself.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS