Christmas came a little early for the Ministry of National Defense and the nation this week, with US President Barack Obama’s administration formally notifying the US Congress of a US$1.83 billion arms sale package for Taipei.
However, amid all the hoopla in Taipei and Washington about notice of the sale — and the all-too-expected protests from Beijing — there are a couple of points worth noting.
While the package is the first major arms proposal from the US in four years, Congress passed the legislation authorizing the sale a year ago, so many people are wondering why it took the Obama administration so long to work out the details.
Furthermore, the items on the list — which include two guided-missile frigates, amphibious assault vehicles and, most notably, shoulder-fired Stinger missiles, but no advanced aircraft, Aegis combat system vessels or submarines — are not headed Taiwan’s way any time soon. The list simply shows what articles have been authorized for sale, out of the ones that Taiwan has asked for, and does not reflect a commitment by Taipei to purchase them.
The ministry said the items would be phased in over a number of years. The long lead time to any weaponry being added to Taiwan’s arsenal was highlighted by the arrival of three Black Hawk helicopters in Kaohsiung on Thursday. The trio are part of the fleet of 60 included in the US$3.1 billion arms deal announced in early 2010 and only the third batch to arrive so far.
Given the difficulty the ministry has had in getting weapons procurement budgets passed by the legislature — largely due to foot-dragging and politicking by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers for more than 15 years — it is not clear when the actual sale of the weapons and training packages will go through.
However, alongside the news of the package from Washington came some words of warning by prominent US lawmakers, such as US Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain, aimed at both Taipei and the White House.
Several lawmakers said US-Taiwan weapons sales needed to become more regularized, while McCain said Taiwan must work to meet its commitment to spend at least 3 percent of annual GDP on defense, something President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration has clearly been reluctant to do, even though one of Ma’s promises when campaigning for the 2008 election was that he would boost the defense budget above the 3 percent of GDP mark. While the military budget did meet the 3 percent mark during Ma’s first full year in office, it fell for the next two years, rose marginally the next two and dropped to 2.48 percent last year.
Even with more arms sales from the US, the defense ministry needs a bigger annual budget, as personnel costs are rising with the shift toward an all-volunteer force.
Meanwhile, the Grinches in Beijing not only called in a top official from the US embassy — though not the ambassador — for a dressing down, saying the arms deal “severely” harmed Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan, but also threatened sanctions against all of the firms, in addition to warning that US-China military-to-military ties would be affected.
However, before Chinese Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Zheng Zeguang (鄭澤光) could complain that the sales went against international law and basic norms of international relations, US Department of State spokesman John Kirby said: “The Chinese can react to this as they see fit” and the deal was in keeping with long-held US policy.
In choosing to announce the arms deal so close to the Jan. 16 presidential and legislative elections, the Obama administration seems to be sending a clear signal to Beijing and Taiwanese voters that it remains solidly in Taiwan’s corner, regardless of who wins the polls. It can also be seen as reaction not only to China’s extensive military build-up over the past several years, but to Beijing’s more recent efforts to impose its sovereignty over the South China Sea.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry