Last weekend, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and his US counterpart, Barack Obama, held a two-day summit in California.
Branded as “a new type of relations between big powers,” one issue attracted the most attention from the outside world.
According to media reports, Xi once again stated his view that the Pacific Ocean was wide enough to accommodate both China and the US.
It was the third time that Xi made the statement in the past year and a half. In addition to Xi’s statement, Chinese State Councilor Yang Jiechi (楊潔篪) said at a briefing after the summit that the two countries should be able to find a new path that is different from the historical precedent of conflict and confrontation between the major powers.
In other words, as far as China is concerned, the joint management of the Pacific Ocean with the US will be a crucial component to this new relationship.
At the same time, Beijing is hoping that Washington will abandon the idea of using military force to contain China and that it accepts the possibility that China might replace the US as the world’s biggest power some day.
As far as Taiwan is concerned, the appearance and development of such a relationship could create two big problems.
First, if the US was to agree to jointly manage the Pacific Ocean with China, then China would likely move to take control of the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea — two regions that Beijing claims are part of China’s core interests.
Second, as China’s strength grows, as do the increasingly overlapping interests between China and the US, the question would be whether Washington is capable and willing enough to continue to play the role of security provider, which maintains the balance in the western Pacific region.
This is why, in the short term, Taiwan must gain a deeper understanding of the scope of this new type of relationship between China and the US and the issues such a relationship would involve.
It must also find ways to enhance communications and negotiations with the US to avoid a negative impact on Taiwan’s interests.
In the medium and long term, Taiwan must be well-prepared and flexible so that it can create new strategic value for itself as China and the US go through a process of strategic adjustments.
It must also make an effort to obtain the greatest benefits possible as a result of the dynamic inconsistencies between China and the US.
In addition, Taiwan should create even closer relations with neighboring countries throughout the region, especially Japan and India.
Doing so would relieve and counterbalance the pressure China is putting on Taiwan and the whole of East Asia.
In short, faced with a new type of relationship between China and the US, Taiwan must not remain aloof from the situation.
It certainly should not resign itself to fate.
Huang Tzu-wei is a researcher at the Taiwan Thinktank.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US