Last week the US National Security Council released a 49-page document entitled The National Security Strategy of the United States of America, outlining US President George W. Bush's strategy for defense and foreign policy for the remainder of his second term. At the same time, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also expressed Washington's growing concerns about China's military build-up.
Washington's statements regarding its dissatisfaction with Beijing's military expansion were conceivably a response to recent comments made by Guo Boxiong (
Stressing Beijing's objections to the efforts of "Taiwanese independence secessionist forces," Guo announced that China's military budget would increase by 14.7 percent this year to 283.8 billion yuan (US$35.3 billion).
The budget increase could be interpreted as a strong reaction to President Chen Shui-bian's (
Washington's grave concerns are caused not only by the military budget increases themselves, but also by the lack of transparency behind them.
Washington faces something of a dilemma: While the Taiwanese government continues to pursue democratization, the US is often hamstrung by its own policy of calling on both sides of the Taiwan Strait to maintain the "status quo."
Bush has repeated his call for a peaceful resolution to cross-strait tensions, warning China that it should not use coercive measures against Taiwan, and cautioning both sides against unilateral actions that change the "status quo."
Nevertheless, when it comes to the question of which side is actively seeking to change the "status quo," we need look only at the military imbalance across the Taiwan Strait for the answer.
Could it be more clear who is rocking the boat and altering the "status quo" through military means? Should the Taiwanese people be considered troublemakers for embracing democracy?
Since the US report called on China to "follow the path of East Asia's many modern democracies, including Taiwan," the current US policy of "encouraging both sides of the Taiwan Strait to engage in dialogue and solve mutual disputes in a peaceful manner" should further incorporate the idea of promoting democratic principles. This would fit with Bush's grand strategy of spreading democracy throughout the world and maintaining regional and international security.
Politicians of all parties in Taiwan should read the US report carefully -- its findings are a timely wake-up call for those who have painted a fanciful picture of unification between Taiwan and China.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
Most importantly, China must recognize the fact that any attempts to intimidate or belittle Taiwan will only have a negative effect.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
The Central Election Commission (CEC) on Friday announced that recall motions targeting 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安) have been approved, and that a recall vote would take place on July 26. Of the recall motions against 35 KMT legislators, 31 were reviewed by the CEC after they exceeded the second-phase signature thresholds. Twenty-four were approved, five were asked to submit additional signatures to make up for invalid ones and two are still being reviewed. The mass recall vote targeting so many lawmakers at once is unprecedented in Taiwan’s political history. If the KMT loses more
RSS