The US and Japan are preparing to deploy troops to Yonaguni Island, giving rise to two interpretations in Taiwan: either the move is aimed at China or at Taiwan. The former interpretation is based on the traditional view of containment, while the latter predicts that Taiwan will become part of China.
The US is deploying Apache attack helicopters on Yonaguni, and this is alarming. The deployment is not aimed at controlling air space but is a preparation to defend the island and evacuate residents if Taiwan loses air supremacy.
There are plenty of examples from history of one party boosting its rival’s expectations by making concessions that eventually lead to war. Western European tolerance of Nazi Germany is a case in point.
President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) “pro-China, anti-Japan” policy will not ensure long-term security across the Taiwan Strait, and this is the reason for the US military deployment despite the US Department of State’s praise of Ma.
It is crucial to understand international relations. In the West, a complex power map with the US and Britain at its heart has gone unchallenged for decades.
Other countries have their roles in the power structure as well, including Taiwan and South Korea. But given the importance to China and Japan of South Korea and the US bases there, Taiwan falls behind South Korea in the power hierarchy.
Small countries often cannot choose which side they are on. This applies to a certain extent to South Korea, not to mention Taiwan, whose status remains undetermined.
The reality is that if Taiwan is not subordinate to the US, it is subordinate to China. The question is whether Washington wants to maintain the US-Japan alliance or wants to embrace its “natural partner on the Asian mainland.” This is closely related to the competition for influence between Germany and France and between Japan and China.
What does the future hold? Taiwanese are worried and Japanese are confused about Taiwan’s position and even their own. As vanquished nations, Germany and Japan have become the fists of the victors, the US and the UK, by hosting US military bases.
The US’ global position is built on its position as the main constituent of the alliances that won two world wars. If Washington abandons this position, international relations will return to the disorderly 19th century situation, with a lack of focus and chaotic wars.
The US is likely to transform from a superpower with total control to a sovereign leader in charge of global, feudal cooperation. The point of departure for this paradigmatic change is the framework of the existing NATO and US-Japan alliances. This gives us a glimpse of the soft power that the administration of US President Barack Obama has discussed.
The key for two countries wanting to maintain their friendship lies in cultural, economic and military cooperation, such as Taiwan’s cooperation with the US and Japan.
If culture and economy are separated from military cooperation, it could have unforeseen consequences, bringing confusion to the relationship between the US, China and Japan.
One example of this is the government’s push for an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) while trying to maintain the Taiwan Strait median line.
China’s Taiwan Affairs Office Director Wang Yi (王毅) has reportedly called for opening the median line and building mutual military trust. This is a consequence of rapid reconciliation and the isolation of culture and the economy over the past year. It will lead to changes to the relationship between the US and Japan.
HoonTing is a freelance writer.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
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