US President George W. Bush’s administration formally notified Congress about an arms sales deal to Taiwan last Friday. Despite the proposed deal being a lot less than what Taiwan asked for, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration is extremely grateful and has started to boast that the deal represents an end to the last eight years of arms deal bickering and a new era of confidence between Taiwan and Washington.
This is typical of the Ma government’s knack for twisting the truth and taking credit for things it shouldn’t. Really, all the new and “streamlined” proposal proves is that the Bush administration is worried about Ma’s pro-China policies.
The US had a reason for waiting until just before the recess of Congress — it wanted Minister of National Defense Chen Chao-min (陳肇敏) to publicly express the Ma administration’s determination to defend Taiwan while he was still on US soil.
Many of the government’s recent actions have made the US doubt the Ma administration’s commitment to protecting Taiwan. These actions have included placing cross-strait relations above other diplomatic relations, proposing eventual unification and even requesting that the US temporarily stop selling arms to Taiwan. These actions were outgrowths of the pan-blue camp’s efforts to block arms spending when the Democratic Progressive Party was in power.
If Taiwan is not determined to defend itself, why should the US play the bad guy and offend China by selling weapons to Taipei? Chen’s participation in the annual US-Taiwan Defense Industry Conference in Florida was not openly reported, but the speech he gave guaranteeing Taiwan’s determination to protect itself has been quoted at great lengths by the Central News Agency, thus making it part of the public record. This was the public commitment the US wanted to hear.
The arms deal does not include submarines, Black Hawk helicopters and the highly advanced F-16C/D that the US has repeatedly refused to offer. This shows that the US is now only willing to provide the most basic weapon systems to Taiwan for defensive purposes. The chance is probably all but gone that Taiwan will be allowed to buy the submarines that Bush in an unprecedented decision approved for sale and that former minister of national defense Lee Jye (李傑) made a top priority.
The Ma administration’s pro-China policies also make it even less likely that the F-16C/Ds will be sold to Taiwan.
The items included in this arms deal are items that the US has in inventory or that they can deliver within a relatively short time.
This allows the US to avoid making long-term commitments to Taiwan.
In addition to the Taiwan Relations Act, the US is bound by the commitments it made in the third of the three communiques it signed with China.
The Ma administration’s betrayal of sovereignty in the name of better cross-strait relations can be exploited by Beijing to demand that the US stop selling arms to Taiwan. China has voice repeated objections to arms sales. It argues that cross-strait relations are at a high point and says the US should not “interfere in China’s internal affairs.”
The dispute over arms sales within Taiwan and the mistrust between Taiwan and the US were created by KMT members. The US has now turned around with a much smaller arms package for Taiwan than hoped for and the Ma government is singing its own praises and taking credit for this “breakthrough.”
This is a prime example of the shameless and unscrupulous nature of the KMT.
Shen Chieh is a freelance writer.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers