The Bush administration has proven itself adept at undermining the political and the strategic standing of the US across the globe, and this is as profoundly evident in Taiwan as it is with the "War on Terror."
Most importantly -- from Taiwan's perspective -- the optimism that greeted Bush's outspoken support for this country in 2001 in the face of China's threatening attitude has now disintegrated. Bush and his advisers appear to be at a loss as to the implications of developments in Taiwan's political arena, and this has been reflected in the way Washington deals with such contentious issues as the procurement of US arms.
The Bush administration's attitude toward Taiwan has been the paragon of hypocrisy, as was witnessed again yesterday. US Air Force Lieutenant General Jeffrey Kohler, who in his post as the head of the Defense Security and Cooperation Agency is in essence the top government arms dealer, criticized Taiwan for "turning defense issues into a political football."
Ignoring the obvious fact that "defense issues" are innately "political" in every democracy, especially the US, the more salient point is that Washington blasts Taiwan for not spending enough on defense, even as it refuses to approve weapons systems that the Ministry of National Defense has requested.
For example, the White House has refused to allow Taiwan to purchase the AGM-88 High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (also known as the HARM), which is a missile designed to destroy radar-equipped air defense systems. It has also denied Taiwan's official request for pricing and availability data on the Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs) -- the package that turns freefall bombs into smart bombs.
The US' reasoning was that these weapons are offensive, not defensive, in nature.
One does not have to be a Clausewitz fanatic to understand that in terms of the strategic application of military power, Taiwan is in no position to launch an assault on China. And since this is the case, why limit the tactical options available to Taiwanese commanders, should they one day have to defend their country?
Surely this situation is not beyond the understanding of Donald "Pre-emptive Strike" Rumsfeld.
Yet this disconnect in US policymaking is not the provenance of the military alone, and it speaks of a misunderstanding of Taiwan's political situation.
Many Taiwan observers in the US have interpreted the Democratic Progressive Party's tribulations, and the subsequent support that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has received, incorrectly.
There is no question that the fortunes of the administration of President Chen Shui-bian (
However, analysts should be careful to interpret this phenomenon in the context of domestic politics, and not as an indication of a major shift in Taiwanese attitudes toward cross-strait policy.
There is nothing yet to indicate that Ma and the KMT, should they attain power in 2008 -- as seems likely at this early juncture -- will be willing to sign an "interim agreement" with the Chinese Communist Party, as one US academic claimed earlier this week.
Ma is not KMT former chairman Lien Chan (
Incompetence and crass arrogance have been a hallmark of Bush and his Cabinet since his first day in office. It is only recently that this has translated into a lack of support for him domestically. The lasting effects of his foreign policy blunders may take years to bear bitter fruit for the US, but they are already degrading his country's options here.
Congressman Mike Gallagher (R-WI) and Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) led a bipartisan delegation to Taiwan in late February. During their various meetings with Taiwan’s leaders, this delegation never missed an opportunity to emphasize the strength of their cross-party consensus on issues relating to Taiwan and China. Gallagher and Krishnamoorthi are leaders of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. Their instruction upon taking the reins of the committee was to preserve China issues as a last bastion of bipartisanship in an otherwise deeply divided Washington. They have largely upheld their pledge. But in doing so, they have performed the
It is well known that Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) ambition is to rejuvenate the Chinese nation by unification of Taiwan, either peacefully or by force. The peaceful option has virtually gone out of the window with the last presidential elections in Taiwan. Taiwanese, especially the youth, are resolved not to be part of China. With time, this resolve has grown politically stronger. It leaves China with reunification by force as the default option. Everyone tells me how and when mighty China would invade and overpower tiny Taiwan. However, I have rarely been told that Taiwan could be defended to
It should have been Maestro’s night. It is hard to envision a film more Oscar-friendly than Bradley Cooper’s exploration of the life and loves of famed conductor and composer Leonard Bernstein. It was a prestige biopic, a longtime route to acting trophies and more (see Darkest Hour, Lincoln, and Milk). The film was a music biopic, a subgenre with an even richer history of award-winning films such as Ray, Walk the Line and Bohemian Rhapsody. What is more, it was the passion project of cowriter, producer, director and actor Bradley Cooper. That is the kind of multitasking -for-his-art overachievement that Oscar
Chinese villages are being built in the disputed zone between Bhutan and China. Last month, Chinese settlers, holding photographs of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), moved into their new homes on land that was not Xi’s to give. These residents are part of the Chinese government’s resettlement program, relocating Tibetan families into the territory China claims. China shares land borders with 15 countries and sea borders with eight, and is involved in many disputes. Land disputes include the ones with Bhutan (Doklam plateau), India (Arunachal Pradesh, Aksai Chin) and Nepal (near Dolakha and Solukhumbu districts). Maritime disputes in the South China