When I was a young man, I served as an infantryman in the Korean War. Many of my fellow soldiers died around me, but in the end we prevented the unification of Korea under a totalitarian dictatorship because we fought for democracy.
That war was the result of aggressive behavior on the part of North Korea, which was subsequently joined by the newly established People’s Republic of China under then-Chinese leader Mao Zedong (毛澤東). China entered the war in October 1950, leading to a major conflict with pitched battles that lasted until the armistice in July 1953.
What also significantly contributed to the start of that war was a statement by then-US secretary of state Dean Acheson that Korea lay outside the US’ Asian defense perimeter. This led former North Korean leader Kim Il-sung to believe that the US would not intervene if he invaded South Korea.
Why am I raising this issue now? Because at the present, the US is deciding on whether to sell advanced weapons to Taiwan and on its military posture in East Asia in the face of a rising China. While the US does need to engage China to encourage it to take a responsible stance toward its neighbors, it should also be emphasized that the US needs to draw clear lines in the sand, so that Beijing fully understands Washington’s position.
One of those lines is to make clear that the US is committed to Taiwan’s defense. As elaborated in the Taiwan Relations Act, this requires that the US “provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character,” adding that it needs “to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan.”
At present, the US government is going through the final stages of its decisionmaking process on the sale of advanced F-16C/D aircraft as well as an upgrade of the existing F-16A/Bs Taiwan operates. This decision will be based on the growing threat posed by the People’s Liberation Army, which has built up its forces across the Taiwan Strait with advanced aircraft, resulting in a major cross-strait military imbalance. It will also be based on the economic benefits to the US in terms of jobs and manufacturing capabilities; certainly a key argument in times of economic downturn.
However, last but not least, the US needs to make clear it is committed to the continued existence of Taiwan as a free and democratic nation. Mixed signals like those of Acheson in the early 1950s would have disastrous consequences. The sale of the F-16C/Ds would be a first step. Beefing up the US’ forward presence in East Asia is another.
However, an even more important step would be to start treating Taiwan as a normal country in its own right. For too long the US has clung to the “one China” policy, which dates back 40 years. The US needs to bring Taiwan out of its externally imposed political isolation.
The Taiwanese have made a momentous transition from an authoritarian regime under former dictator Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who claimed he would “recover” China, to a vibrant Taiwanese democracy that began to take shape under former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝).
Don’t the people of Taiwan deserve a US adjustment of its policies to reflect this new situation, bringing Taiwan in from the cold? To do that, the US needs to safeguard their hard-earned democracy and ensure their freedoms and security by giving them the means to defend themselves.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan. The views expressed in this article are his own.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Taiwan’s business-friendly environment and science parks designed to foster technology industries are the key elements of the nation’s winning chip formula, inspiring the US and other countries to try to replicate it. Representatives from US business groups — such as the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, and the Arizona-Taiwan Trade and Investment Office — in July visited the Hsinchu Science Park (新竹科學園區), home to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) headquarters and its first fab. They showed great interest in creating similar science parks, with aims to build an extensive semiconductor chain suitable for the US, with chip designing, packaging and manufacturing. The