The decision by the administration of US President Barack Obama to approve the sale of an additional package of arms to Taiwan comes just in the nick of time. It does show a realization on the part of the US administration that Taiwan should not be left to fend for itself, but needs both support and encouragement from the US.
For too long, the people of Taiwan have had the impression that the US was too busy with issues elsewhere in the world — Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran — to be concerned with Taiwan’s drift toward China’s sphere of influence. The arms sale has changed that: It is a signal that the US will stand by its commitments under the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act and may help defend Taiwan.
Having said that, we may want to ask if the signal is strong enough? This depends on how much further the Obama administration is willing to go. Will it keep the door open to further packages such as the 66 F-16C/D jet fighters requested by Taipei in 2006 or the submarines that have been under discussion since at least 2001? And there might be other items required to redress the increasing imbalance in air and naval power across the Taiwan Strait. In particular, is there anything that has truly addressed the imbalance of missiles across the Strait? It is essential that the US works with Taiwan on these issues.
The announcement of the sale also comes at a time of increasing belligerence and recalcitrance by Beijing on a wide array of issues: the sentencing of human rights activist Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波) — author of Charter 08 — to 11 years in prison; the blocking of a meaningful accord at the global warming conference in Copenhagen; the refusal to agree on sanctions against Iran; the harsh crackdowns in Tibet and East Turkestan; cyber terrorism against Google and other Western companies and even government offices.
These developments are prompting a fundamental reassessment among Western governments and companies on the nature of engagement with China. The assumption behind US and European policy toward China until now has been that economic opening would lead to political liberalization. This basic premise seems increasingly less tenable: What we see is the rise of China — both economically and politically — accompanied with increasing authoritarianism at home and a willingness to throw its weight around in support of unsavory regimes and causes.
The Obama administration needs to stand firm on the basic principles of human rights and democracy. These cannot be whittled away in exchange for expediency in getting China to move a few inches on issues such as Iran or North Korea.
Against this background, it is also essential that Taiwan clearly shows it wants to remain a free and democratic nation and wants to strengthen its ties with the democratic West instead of moving into the sphere of influence of an undemocratic and repressive China. All too often, economic and business interests push a government in the direction of narrow and short-term gains. Taiwan’s government needs to keep a longer-term vision of a free and democratic Taiwan in mind.
It also needs to be emphasized that peace and stability in the Strait can only be achieved if Taiwan maintains strong political, economic and social ties with the many democratic countries, especially its neighbors, and keeps a healthy distance from China.
The new arms sale by the Obama administration is a good beginning to help make this possible.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS