The US’ Marine Corps University on Monday conducted a World War III simulation that had Taiwan as one of the fronts, with China, Russia and North Korea as belligerents.
The university said that the exercise was not intended to be preparations for war with those countries, and that the main focus was the European front, where the majority of US forces were sent in the simulation.
There is no doubt, given regional tensions and China’s militarization of the South China Sea, that US military officials are seriously thinking about potential conflict in the region.
However, US preparedness relies heavily on its partnerships in the Indo-Pacific, which is where doubt remains.
At the Five Power Defence Arrangements meeting in Singapore on June 2, 2017, regional leaders discussed potential security arrangements that would bolster cooperation and reduce dependence on the US.
“We have to take responsibility for our own security and prosperity, while recognizing we are stronger when sharing the burden of collective leadership with trusted partners and friends,” then-Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull said at the meeting.
Singaporean Minister of Defense Ng Eng Hen (黃永宏) said that his country welcomed cooperation with the US, but was concerned about policymaking at the top levels of the US government and was worried about the US being the only nation “powerful enough to set red lines with China.”
In a poll cited in a report published on the Foreign Policy Web site on Jan. 8, respondents in ASEAN said that they lacked confidence in the US’ policies in the region.
The US’ freedom of navigation exercises in the area had not deterred China from obstructing economic activity by those nations in their own waters, the report said.
A report published by the National Interest Web site on Nov. 6 last year cited the growing challenges US businesses face in the Chinese market as “an underlying driver of bipartisan willingness to get tough on China.”
However, a heavy-handed approach would not work, because the US’ allies in the region still heavily depend on Beijing economically, it said.
The US needs to be more flexible and needs a clear strategy, it said, adding that US allies in Asia do not want to take sides in a US-China conflict.
Resolving the South China Seas crisis would require multiparty dialogue and it is imperative to bring China to the negotiating table.
China wants to be respected, and it sees the area within the “nine-dash line” as its territory, so there is no way it will agree to remove bases from it.
Regional leaders should seek to negotiate an agreement with China that protects their economic interests in those waters, and should seek shared responsibility to protect those operating in the area from conflict, piracy and other illegal activity. If China is to have military personnel stationed there, why not put them to use? Drug trafficking, human trafficking and piracy are major problems along major sea lanes, and China could work with other regional governments to combat this.
If China were to be in partnerships, it would be less likely to antagonize.
Taiwan could also participate in shared policing of the South China Sea.
The US and its partners in the Indo-Pacific — including Taiwan — must engage China in productive ways, while reducing their dependency on China’s market.
A strong China in itself is not a threat, but if it feels alienated or ostracized, it is likely to lash out. Therefore, cooperation that holds China accountable is needed.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
On Wednesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) drew parallels between the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) under President William Lai (賴清德) now and the fascism of Germany under Adolf Hitler. The German Institute Taipei, Berlin’s de facto embassy in Taiwan, expressed on social media its “deep disappointment and concern” over the comments. “We must state unequivocally: Taiwan today is in no way comparable to the tyranny of National Socialism,” it said, referring to the Nazi Party. “We are disappointed and concerned to learn about the inappropriate comparison between the atrocities of the Nazi regime and the current political context
RSS