There has been considerable talk in the US recently to the effect that Washington will, and even should, end its role as Taiwan’s protector. A lot of the talk is serious.
There is good reason for this. In 2009, when US President Barack Obama visited China, he concurred that Taiwan is a Chinese “core interest” and has subsequently delayed and limited arms sales to Taiwan. The US Congress seems to have no interest in Taiwan these days with so many other issues to deal with. The US public does not want another war. A number of former top officials have suggested the country let China have Taiwan.
The central concern is that the US is suffering from strategic overstretching and debilitating debt. Thus, Washington finds it impossible to sustain its role as the world’s policeman. Many say cut back now. In fact, Obama has already sliced the US defense budget considerably.
In contrast, China has trillions of US dollars in foreign exchange and its economy is roaring ahead with a 9 or 10 percent growth rate, compared with the US’ 1 or 2 percent. The US will go broke if it engages in an arms race with China. In fact, some say China could cause the US to collapse as the US did to the Soviet Union a couple of decades ago.
Anyway, some in the US say the government and ruling party in Taiwan want unification with China, while the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would pick a fight with China to suit its own objectives and draw the Washington into another war. Taiwan’s supporters in the US are understandably perplexed.
However, is this really the situation?
Starting with Taiwan, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) hardly wants to trade his position as head of state of what is for all intents and purposes a sovereign country for a lesser position in China.
Most of the top leaders of his Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) would prefer to be where they are and cannot be optimistic about their future in a Chinese government. Hence, they do not really want unification except as an ideal or in the distant future.
DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is not supporting independence, at least not as former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) did, which angered Washington. Chen is in prison and his influence in the party is almost gone. Tsai is the DPP’s candidate for the presidential election next year and has an agenda that focuses on other issues.
Then there is the question of whether China wants to incorporate Taiwan. Of course it does. But now? China’s paramount foreign policy objective is to keep its economic expansion on track. Taiwan contributes to that. Incorporation would not improve the situation; in fact it would likely have the opposite effect as it would anger and/or scare many of China’s commercial partners.
Another reason China probably does not want Taiwan immediately is that unification would likely be seen as a victory for the military; civilian leaders want to keep the military under control. (Many think it has become a loose cannon of late.) Chinese leaders feel that Taiwan will eventually want unification because of China’s economic attraction and that would be a better way of solving the problem.
Though some say Taiwan has no real value to the US in today’s new strategic climate, this is not the case. In control of Taiwan, China would use its west coast ports, especially Suao (蘇澳), as a submarine base. Its subs would enter deep water where they could not be tracked and could appear without warning off the coast of California where US cities would be in range of its missiles.
Just as important, if it appeared that Washington had abandoned Taiwan, or China achieved unification through pressure, the US’ credibility would be lost and so would its Asian allies.
Taiwan is also an indispensible source of intelligence on China, intelligence which the US needs. Add to this the fact that Taiwan is a democracy and became such under US tutelage. Abandoning Taiwan would clearly undermine Washington’s call for democracy in the Middle East and elsewhere.
Finally, it appears (at least when realist voices are heard from the Obama administration) that the US is pursuing a balance of power strategy in Asia to deal with China’s military expansion. It has been shoring up its relationship with Japan, ASEAN nations and India. Japan and India are fearful of China’s rise and want to balance it and ASEAN countries want to keep US influence in the region.
What is nice about a balance or equilibrium system is that it can be fairly inexpensive for the balancer — the US. Thus, the US may be able to maintain some presence in Asia, the center of the world’s economic and military growth.
Most US policymakers also realize that opting out of Asia means the US can no longer claim to be a great power. Geopolitically it would appear that Taiwan has a role to play in such a system. At least Washington needs to think of this as an option.
John Copper is the Stanley J. Buckman professor of international studies at Rhodes College in Memphis, Tennessee.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry