Several US academics have argued in recent articles that the US should distance itself from Taiwan because China’s power and influence are rising and it would become more “costly” for the US to maintain close ties with Taipei, and in particular maintain its defense obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act.
Charles Glaser of George Washington University argued along those lines in a recent article in Foreign Affairs, while Bob Sutter, also of GWU, recently painted an equally gloomy picture, saying that the rise of China is giving Beijing leverage over Taiwan, and in light of Taiwan’s weakening positions in economic and military strength and the diplomatic front, the status quo is becoming unsustainable and Taiwan has very limited options for its future and unification with China is deemed inevitable.
The academics seem to make two assumptions: first, that the rise of China is unstoppable and the US needs to adjust its policy to accommodate Beijing’s increasing influence on the international stage; and second, that given China’s economic and military power, Chinese annexation of Taiwan is a foregone conclusion.
Neither of these assumptions takes account of the most important reason for US support for Taiwan — that Taiwan is a democracy and that China is still ruled by an authoritarian regime. If the US wants democracy to prevail in East Asia, it needs to be more assertive in its support for a democratic nation like Taiwan.
If the US wants China to become democratic, it needs to maintain a vibrant democracy on its doorstep. Right under the surface in China, people are clearly longing for a more free and open political system. Hundreds of human rights activists are languishing in prison, including Nobel Laureate Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波). In recent months, China has, in an effort to prevent anything similar to the revolutions spreading across the Arab world, intensified repressive measures and arrested and imprisoned more human rights activists, journalists, Internet bloggers and artists.
The basic conclusion is that China will not become democratic if the US gives up on Taiwan. However, the scenario of Taiwan’s eventual unification with China is also totally out of step with the aspirations of Taiwanese. A recent opinion poll conducted by the Global Views survey center showed that nearly 70 percent of respondents rejected unification with China, and given a free choice, would opt for independence.
At this point, the people of Taiwan can still say what they want, in spite of China’s military threat and intimidation. In less than eight months, on Jan. 14, Taiwanese are going to the polls to elect a new president.
The choice is clear: the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has maneuvered Taiwan into closer orbit with China, while the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) wants to retain Taiwan’s freedom and democracy, and — if elected — would steer the nation toward a more balanced policy, seeking closer cooperation with the US and other democracies like Japan.
Taiwan is at a critical juncture in its history. Recent opinion polls have shown that DPP presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), the first female presidential candidate in the history of Taiwan, is in a good position to win the presidency. In a recent Forbes article, she was described as a pathfinder and a creative thinker who has proposed practical and moderate approaches to dealing with China.
Instead of distancing itself from this budding democracy, the US should be more supportive of democracy in Taiwan and respect the aspirations of Taiwanese to continue to live in freedom and democracy.
Chen Mei-chin is a commentator in Washington.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS