Second, Freeman opined that the Taiwanese electorate has resigned itself to the island's inability to indefinitely withstand the demands of its powerful neighbor. This is the converse of Thomas Paine's observation that an island -- he was writing of Great Britain and its rebellious American colonies -- could not forever rule a continent.
In Freeman's analysis, Taiwanese lawmakers' repeated rejection of the US arms package under consideration since 2001 is proof of Taipei's decision not to stand up for itself militarily. And, indeed, the opposition-dominated Legislative Yuan this past spring voted down the arms package for the 50th time. And counting.
Both of these claims -- that economic integration renders warfare moot and that an island cannot compete with a nearby continental power militarily -- are subject to rational debate. One gets the feeling, however, that Taiwan's leaders and rank-and-file citizens are so distracted with scandal and embittered partisan politics that they've lost sight of the big questions.
If Taiwan opts not to keep up its defenses, that's its prerogative. But let it be by conscious decision, not by default. The stakes are too high.
James Holmes is a senior research associate at the Center for International Trade and Security, University of Georgia.
RSS