During the past weeks, the tensions surrounding the Senkaku Islands [Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台)] have risen significantly. China has continued to send patrol ships into the area, often getting close to, or crossing over, the 12 nautical mile (22km) line marking the territorial waters surrounding the islands. Last month, China also sent a surveillance aircraft into the area, prompting Japan — which also claims the islands, and calls them the Senkakus — to scramble F-15s.
The escalation comes right after both Japan and China have gone through a leadership transition: Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping (習近平) was appointed general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in November last year, while Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s Liberal Democratic Party won elections in December.
It is disheartening that in his first major foreign policy speech, given earlier this week to the CCP’s politburo, Xi was highly assertive on China’s claims, saying: “No foreign country should ever nurse hopes that we will bargain over our core national interests.”
The way the term “core interests” has been used by Beijing reflects a rigid position: It has covered the harsh crackdowns in Tibet and East Turkestan as well as its inflexibility on Taiwan. While gradually pushing Taiwan into its unwelcome economic embrace, it has refused to take down and dismantle the 1,600 missiles aimed at Taiwan, thus maintaining the means to coerce the nation into submission.
China’s increasing belligerence on the Senkaku issue has led the administration of US President Barack Obama to lean heavily on China and Japan. In mid-January, US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Kurt Campbell led a heavyweight delegation to Tokyo and Beijing, urging cooler heads to prevail. A few days later, US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton — with Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida standing beside her — stated that the Obama administration opposed “any unilateral actions that would seek to undermine Japanese administration” of the islands — a clear reference to China.
As the US clearly has its hands full trying to keep the situation under control, it would behoove Taiwan [which also claims the Diaoyutais] to try to calm the waters and not rock the boat. That is why it was so utterly incomprehensible that on Jan. 24, Taiwan allowed a fishing boat with activists to sail to the islands.
According to press reports, this fishing boat was accompanied by four Taiwanese coast guard vessels, resulting in a standoff with Japan Coast Guard vessels, which then led to a replay of the water cannon fight that occurred at the end of September last year.
It must be emphasized that this is not responsible policy. These kinds of provocative actions are not helpful, and damage Taiwan’s interests in the region and its relations with the US. It estranges Taiwan from its democratic neighbors and undermines the nation’s image in Washington: It needs to be seen as playing a constructive role, not stirring up trouble.
As I have stated before, it is essential that Taiwan remains on good terms with the democracies in the region, the US, Japan and South Korea. That in itself will help safeguard its existence as a free and democratic nation. China is not democratic, and thus, appearing to move in line with Beijing’s position and against Japan’s will undermine freedom and democracy in Taiwan.
Nat Bellocchi served as chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1990 through 1995. The views expressed in this article are his own.
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
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
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with