Former US president George W. Bush planned to station missile interceptors in Poland and radar bases in the Czech Republic to prevent Iran from attacking Europe with missiles. However, because the plan upset Russia, US President Barack Obama canceled it. A Wall Street Journal editorial criticized Obama for giving dictators more room to maneuver while not giving those who challenge dictators enough opportunities.
Obama’s tendency to please enemy states while overlooking allies and the way he has dealt with Poland and Tibet make one wonder whether he might postpone the sale of F16C/D fighter planes to Taiwan because of Chinese opposition. This is something that Taiwan cannot afford to ignore.
Obama administration officials have repeatedly said the US has the responsibility to provide defensive weapons to Taiwan according to the Taiwan Relations Act. However, he has also extended strategic guarantees to Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤). While the Obama administration slapped 35 percent tariffs on Chinese tires and sent the USS Chung-Hoon destroyer to protect the US’ naval right of passage in the South China Sea, his postponing of a meeting the Dalai Lama, muted criticism of China’s human rights and finance policies and increasing China’s voting power in the IMF all show that moral principles are losing to practical concerns.
Over the past two years, Taiwan has set funds aside and requested that the US provide it with weapons. At the 2009 US-Taiwan Defense Industry Conference, Deputy Minister of National Defense Chao Shih-chang (趙世璋) said budgets and policy implementation in the coming years would be hindered because major procurement deals such as those for F-16C/D fighters cannot be completed in time. In the past, it was Taiwan that delayed arms purchases; now it is the US government, and in doing so it is allowing the cross-strait military balance to shift in Beijing’s favor.
Obama will find that the longer he postpones the sale of the F16C/Ds to Taiwan, the stronger China’s reaction and the higher the price the US and Taiwan will have to pay to pacify it.
After the Taiwan Strait crisis in 1996, then-US president Bill Clinton realized that there were not enough military exchanges between the US and Taiwan, that neither side understood the other enough and that this highlighted serious security issues. Under the leadership of Kurt Campbell, then deputy assistant secretary of defense for Asia and the Pacific, the US and Taiwan increased collaboration on issues aside from arms purchases, including exchanges on strategic ideas, crisis scenarios and system integration. Campbell is now assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs. In the past, he was also a member of the Center for a New American Security, a Washington-based think tank, as is US Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs Wallace Gregson.
This implies that the Obama administration plans to increase the “soft power” of Taiwan’s military and will not be focusing so much on weapons sales.
At the conference, Gregson said that as Taiwan’s national defense resources are limited, Taiwan should adopt more creative security concepts.
He also suggested that Taiwan develop asymmetric warfare capabilities. This suggestion is very similar to the “porcupine” defense strategy proposed by US Naval War College professor William Murray and probably shows the way for future US-Taiwan cooperation on defense. The method dodges the matter of selling F16C/Ds to Taiwan and eases US worries that US-made weapons could end up in Chinese hands 20 years from now.
Lin Cheng-yi is the director of the Institute of European and American Studies at Academia Sinica.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Victory in conflict requires mastery of two “balances”: First, the balance of power, and second, the balance of error, or making sure that you do not make the most mistakes, thus helping your enemy’s victory. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has made a decisive and potentially fatal error by making an enemy of the Jewish Nation, centered today in the State of Israel but historically one of the great civilizations extending back at least 3,000 years. Mind you, no Israeli leader has ever publicly declared that “China is our enemy,” but on October 28, 2025, self-described Chinese People’s Armed Police (PAP) propaganda
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so