As the special arms-procurement bill continues to be kept off the legislative agenda, some of Taiwan's US friends, who have shown concern for the nation in the past, are becoming disillusioned, and have begun to question whether Taiwan truly has the determination to defend itself. Statements by a US defense official indicate that there is a shift in attitude and policy on the defense of Taiwan.
On Sept. 19, Edward Ross, director of the US Defense Department's Defense Security Cooperation Agency, said at a defense industry conference sponsored by the US-Taiwan Business Council in San Diego, California, that by virtue of the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), the US is not obliged to defend Taiwan. He said that the terms of the agreement were that the US come to the aid of Taiwan for the purpose of Taiwan's "self defense" if and when Taiwan came under attack.
Ross went on to say that the responsibility for Taiwan's self defense should lie with Taiwan itself rather than with the US, and that if Taiwan does not have the ability to defend itself, then the US was not obliged to defend it.
Ross said that over the past decade, Taiwanese political leaders have been overly dependent on Washington, which has resulted in a decrease in Taiwan's defense budget.
He then fiercely criticized the special arms budget, which has become a political football and remains stalled in the legislature. The American public is beginning to ask, "If Taiwan is not willing to invest in its national defense, why should the US defend Taiwan?"
It was ironic that at around the time Ross made these comments, the arms budget was once again rejected by the legislature's Procedure Committee for the 29th time.
Taiwan is a sovereign nation. Therefore, it should have the ability and determination to defend itself since this is the way to safeguard the security of its people's lives and property.
If Taiwan continues to depend on foreign military protection and does nothing to defend itself, it will be despised by the international community and be a disappointment to its allies. It would be undermining its own status as a sovereign nation.
Can a nation that cannot develop or manufacture advanced military weapons, that refuses to spend any money on such arms offered by its allies, but instead believes that its allies have a duty to defend it, be considered an independent nation?
Ross's scathing comments unquestionably embarrassed pan-blue politicians, who do not fear China only because they believe the US has a moral responsibility to defend Taiwan. Some lean toward Beijing, and look forward to entering the embrace of the "motherland." As they expect Taiwan to revert to China one day, they don't see any need for self defense.
The pan-blue camp continues to obstruct the arms bill and ignores the normal behavior of an opposition party in a democratic country by refusing even to give legislators an opportunity to debate the issue. They cite innumerable excuses for behaving in this way, the most preposterous of which is the idea that they are "caring for the public's wallets."
The true motive, however, is evil and will never be publicly admitted, because it runs counter to the interests and wishes of the Taiwanese people.
The Chinese military threat toward Taiwan is a serious one while Taiwan's military capabilities are falling further behind Beijing's. Most importantly, the arms procurement bill was planned and proposed by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government, but US President George W. Bush only approved the sale after the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) came to power.
The DPP is thus simply following through on its predecessor's policies, while the pan-blue camp is doing its utmost to block the bill. This is very difficult to understand. It really is like Ross said, the arms bill has become a political football. It is regrettable that Taiwan's security is being sacrificed for the sake of this political game.
An independent nation should have a sense of its own dignity. In addition to the special arms budget, the government should increase the annual defense budget to maintain an adequate defensive strength.
If the pan-blue camp wants to clarify the doubts among outsiders regarding Taiwan's China-friendly parties, it needs to give up its irrational obstruction of the arms bill. It has the responsibility to explain its repeated obstruction of the bill to the people.
National defense involves the lives and well-being of every Taiwanese. The people of Taiwan should therefore take a tough approach and demand that the parties opposed to the arms procurement bill deal with the issue rationally if they want to avoid the annihilation of the country.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti and Perry Svensson
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
Liberals have wasted no time in pointing to Karol Nawrocki’s lack of qualifications for his new job as president of Poland. He has never previously held political office. He won by the narrowest of margins, with 50.9 percent of the vote. However, Nawrocki possesses the one qualification that many national populists value above all other: a taste for physical strength laced with violence. Nawrocki is a former boxer who still likes to go a few rounds. He is also such an enthusiastic soccer supporter that he reportedly got the logos of his two favorite teams — Chelsea and Lechia Gdansk —
RSS