A week after Typhoon Morakot wreaked havoc in southern Taiwan, US Marine helicopters landed here for the first time since the US switched political recognition from Taiwan to China in 1979.
The helicopters are stationed at the US military base in Okinawa, Japan — less than 1,000km from Taiwan — yet they needed eight days to get here, thus missing the critical 72-hour post-disaster window.
This was the result of steadfast accommodation of Beijing’s “one China” principle by President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his administration and their refusal to accept US aid, which potentially sacrificed hundreds of lives. Although the government has now accepted US assistance, new problems are emerging.
During a US State Department press briefing on Aug. 11, Assistant Secretary of State Philip Crowley said the US could use its assets in the Asia-Pacific region to assist Taiwan and cited the case of the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, in which the US was able to respond to the tragedy in Indonesia in a timely manner.
But Crowley said he would defer to the Pentagon in terms of what the government might deploy. This suggests that at the time, the US was disposed to sending forces in the Pacific to provide aid in the same way it did in response to the Sumatra-Andaman Islands disaster.
The USS Abraham Lincoln carrier group was sent to waters off the Indonesian island of Sumatra in support of the rescue and relief effort in the aftermath of the tsunami. Since all roads to badly hit Aceh Province were cut off, a strong US airlift, search and rescue mission, as well as investigative operations, provided vital aid to Indonesia.
As initial rescue efforts depended on airlifts, the Abraham Lincoln played a crucial role in directing and coordinating air missions. The US also pointed out later that the command, control, communications and intelligence systems of the super-carrier provided crucial assistance within the first 72 hours of the tsunami — the period of time when it was urgent to identify areas in need of evacuation.
The American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) and Japan’s Interchange Association are the only two de facto embassies in Taiwan with branch offices in Kaohsiung, so they understood how seriously the typhoon devastated southern areas. Had the AIT’s Kaohsiung branch not reported to Washington on the disaster, the State Department, which has stuck to the “one China” policy, would not have expressed its willingness to deploy the military to join the rescue effort because of the sensitivity of US-Taiwan relations.
Incompetent but mindful of the “one China” principle, the Ma administration was acutely aware of the military implications. Reports say that Taiwan’s National Security Council (NSC) suggested that the government turn down US aid and not call for international assistance until after receiving donations from China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait.
The government’s attempt to curry favor with China could thus have been the major cause of delays in the rescue effort. With this, the 72-hour window closed and countless people died.
Taiwan’s emergency response system is in chaos. The rescue effort suffered from delayed coordination with the US military because of the NSC, which opposed US aid because of its adherence to the “one China” principle. The NSC may now have trouble coordinating high-level communications between Taiwan and the US after doubts were aired by the State Department.
Thus, the arrival of the US military rescue team in Taiwan marks the beginning of more problems for the government.
Lai I-chung is director of foreign policy studies at Taiwan Thinktank.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is