Taiwan’s peaceful transfer of political power offers further evidence that the regime in Beijing is wrong when it suggests democracy is not possible in China.
Taiwan remains an embarrassment to Beijing’s aging leadership who condescendingly assert that market-based democratic traditions are inconsistent with Chinese culture. In the blogosphere Chinese are increasingly asking: “If Taiwan can democratically elect a president, why can’t we?”
Beijing is undergoing an increasingly uneasy leadership change, where not one member of the Chinese power structure is directly elected by the people. A corrupt Chinese Communist Party (CCP) looks increasingly entitled, repressive and cut-off from the Chinese people.
US policymakers need to understand Taiwan’s political and social significance to China’s transition now underway. Failure to do so only serves to re-enforce attitudes among ultra-nationalists in Beijing who would gladly snuff out Taipei’s experiment in freedom. Based on their statements, a growing number of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) hardliners seem to feel that former Chinese chairman Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) famous statement to then-US secretary of state Henry Kissinger four decades ago, that: “We can wait 100 years for Taiwan,” is now outdated.
Rather than engage Taiwan as a partner, whose political and social history offers a useful roadmap to greater democracy at home, Beijing sees Taiwan’s emerging democracy as a threat. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the PLA has pivoted much of its military assets away from China’s northern border and to its east coast instead. We know from experts’ analysis of PLA military planning that a large part of the US$100 billion in annual military expenditures now undertaken is directed at Taiwan-related contingencies.
The loss of Taiwan to Chinese domination would have far-reaching repercussions. From Seoul in the north to Canberra in the south, such a policy retreat would likely raise questions among our Asia-Pacific allies about the US’ Pacific staying power. Some of our old friends might even decide that the time has come to cut their losses and seek an accommodation with Beijing before it is too late.
With control of Taiwan, Beijing would be able to dictate terms of engagement with both Tokyo and Seoul. The PLA Navy would dominate the crucial sea lanes around Taiwan and its seizure would also break the current freedom of navigation in the first island chain off the Asian coast, allowing Beijing to pursue its strategy of denying access to the US Navy.
As China’s air and sea power rapidly expands, it is key that the US approve Taiwan’s request for next generation F-16 jets to replace an aging fleet provided at the end of the Cold War. Taiwan also needs diesel submarines to counter Beijing’s rapidly expanding submarine fleet.
Leaving Taiwan exposed to Beijing’s incessant bullying and potential aggression is not the answer. Inaction on provision of defensive weapons as mandated by the US Congress in the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) is a prescription for disaster. I have put forward legislation, known as the Taiwan Policy Act, to enhance the TRA and to strengthen our ties with Taiwan.
Beijing seeks to marginalize US strategic and commercial interests in the world’s most economically vibrant region. Any success would have a direct impact on lives of US citizens. Without access to Asian markets, the US economy would decline.
If the 21st century is the “Asian century,” then a democratic Taiwan free of mainland domination remains a lynchpin for curtailing Chinese hegemony over the Asian continent. Thus, the US must stand by Taiwan to ensure our shared strategic and economic interests are protected.
US Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen chairs the US House of Representatives’ Foreign Affairs Committee.
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
RSS