Legal argument flawed
HoonTing (雲程) has broken new ground in the search for a collective security mechanism for Taiwan.
In contrast, Hofstra University law professor Julian Ku has argued that Taiwan should be left to fend for itself against a Chinese invasion. He has incorrectly stated that it is illegal to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion. Professor Ku has made the argument that defending Taiwan is illegal under UN Charter Article 51 — the right to collective self-defense.
The geopolitical problem in northeast Asia is that there has not been a multilateral treaty signed for collective self-defense against Chinese interference. Since Japan signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty in 1951, there has been only the bilateral mutual defense treaty signed with the US. Japan signed the bilateral defense treaty on the same day that it signed the peace treaty.
The US and South Korea signed a bilateral defense treaty in 1955. The US-ROC Mutual Defense Treaty was also signed in 1955, but then former US president Jimmy Carter’s administration terminated this bilateral treaty in 1980. The Taiwan Relations Act is a substitute for this termination, but the treaty-making powers were examined in Goldwater versus Carter (1983).
There is an argument that the executive branch can exercise their monopoly over foreign affairs, but the court states they had not examined the issue of the termination in terms of actions by the commander-in-chief. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has attempted to drive a wedge between the bilateral security arrangements in Northeast Asia with the conflicts over the Diaoyu Islands (釣魚).
The solution for collective self-defense lies in the trilateral relationship between the US and Japan, South Korea and Taiwan.
While Professor Ku argues that collectively defending the island of Taiwan is illegal, the “San Francisco System” fosters the continuation of the 1950s’ geopolitical problems of the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan.
Hoon Ting, however, explores historical concepts of derecognized exiled governments and their roles in the geopolitical situation of Northeast Asia. Some exiled governments are sponsored by their recognizing states, and this bilateral military relationship between the US and its co-belligerent exiled government (eg, Free French on Continental France) demonstrates they were the instruments of both foreign policy and military strategy.
The San Francisco System underwrites the security of the ROC and casts a shadow whenever creating collective security arrangements for Northeast Asia.
US policy makers must become cognizant that the geopolitical history of the Korean War Armistice is rooted in the San Francisco System. US Foreign policy has military ramifications for the protection of both South Korea and Taiwan, but then termination of mutual defense treaties was never examined by the US Supreme Court in Goldwater versus Carter.
Perhaps it is time to reexamine treaty-making powers in US jurisprudence before the PLA lawyers adopt the international law advice of Professor Ku.
US leadership in our collective security arrangement must be reformulated before blue-helmeted PLA troops start invading Taiwan under the legal auspices of Article 51 of the UN Charter.
I look forward to further research on the topic.
Seung Mi Hong
Seoul, South Korea
President William Lai (賴清德) attended a dinner held by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) when representatives from the group visited Taiwan in October. In a speech at the event, Lai highlighted similarities in the geopolitical challenges faced by Israel and Taiwan, saying that the two countries “stand on the front line against authoritarianism.” Lai noted how Taiwan had “immediately condemned” the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas and had provided humanitarian aid. Lai was heavily criticized from some quarters for standing with AIPAC and Israel. On Nov. 4, the Taipei Times published an opinion article (“Speak out on the
The image was oddly quiet. No speeches, no flags, no dramatic announcements — just a Chinese cargo ship cutting through arctic ice and arriving in Britain in October. The Istanbul Bridge completed a journey that once existed only in theory, shaving weeks off traditional shipping routes. On paper, it was a story about efficiency. In strategic terms, it was about timing. Much like politics, arriving early matters. Especially when the route, the rules and the traffic are still undefined. For years, global politics has trained us to watch the loud moments: warships in the Taiwan Strait, sanctions announced at news conferences, leaders trading
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
News about expanding security cooperation between Israel and Taiwan, including the visits of Deputy Minister of National Defense Po Horng-huei (柏鴻輝) in September and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Francois Wu (吳志中) this month, as well as growing ties in areas such as missile defense and cybersecurity, should not be viewed as isolated events. The emphasis on missile defense, including Taiwan’s newly introduced T-Dome project, is simply the most visible sign of a deeper trend that has been taking shape quietly over the past two to three years. Taipei is seeking to expand security and defense cooperation with Israel, something officials
RSS