Faced with two great powers — the US and China — some people in Taiwan say: “It is hard to be a small country between two big ones.”
These people advocate “equidistant diplomacy” as a survival strategy. However, this fancy argument cannot deceive people who have at least some sense of right and wrong, and who support the idea of Taiwan as a sovereign state.
If China recognized Taiwan’s national status and had no ambition to annex it, it would make more sense to advocate “equidistant diplomacy.” However, China’s intention to annex Taiwan is written clearly in its constitution and its “Anti-Secession” Law, along with its frequent intimidation and saber-rattling.
This is what gangsters do and to accept being extorted by gangsters would mean going back to the law of the jungle.
After the end of World War II, the US earned the title of “the world’s policeman” by using its monetary and military strengths to safeguard the ideas of democracy and freedom, and to prevent communist expansion and aggression. The communist world called the US “imperialist,” but the US did not invade Cuba, which is on its doorstep, or annex Taiwan, which Japan abandoned after the war. From Taiwan’s point of view, the US is a policeman, not a gangster.
Although the US cut diplomatic ties with the Republic of China in 1979, it immediately enacted the Taiwan Relations Act. While the US has not recognized Taiwan as a nation, the way it applies the law treats it as such. The US provides Taiwan with weapons for its self defense and promises to ensure its security.
Faced with the Chinese gangster and the US policeman, it is clear which choice Taiwan should make.
Taiwan can show goodwill and avoid provoking the gangster, but it would be unreasonable to maintain an equidistant relationship between the gangster and the policeman, as if there were no difference between good and evil.
The post-war international order is dominated by the US and the US clearly knows that, according to the Treaty of San Francisco — the document that officially and legally ended the Pacific War — Taiwan’s status is undetermined.
This means that the US and other signatories did not recognize China’s claim of sovereignty over Taiwan.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime, in its own selfish interest, did not dare remind the signatories about the treaty’s terms regarding Taiwan’s status or insist that Taiwanese have the right to decide their own future. It just held on to Taiwan while playing a zero-sum game with China.
The Democratic Progressive Party government should change the tune by reminding the 49 signatories about its provisions regarding Taiwan’s status, as well as Taiwan’s democratization.
To become a normal country, Taiwan should stand on the side of the policeman and the law, rather than letting itself be recruited by a gangster.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng (何立峰) are expected to meet this month in Paris to prepare for a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). According to media reports, the two sides would discuss issues such as the potential purchase of Boeing aircraft by China, increasing imports of US soybeans and the latest impacts of Trump’s reciprocal tariffs. However, recent US military action against Iran has added uncertainty to the Trump-Xi summit. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called the joint US-Israeli airstrikes and the
RSS