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
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US