The Taiwan Security Enhancement Act (TSEA) has taken its first major step toward enactment as a law of the United States, with the approval by the House of Representatives International Relations Committee. This piece of legislation, as we have argued before, holds the promise of genuine improvement in Taiwan's security, as well as helping to reduce the level of psychological insecurity felt by many Taiwanese.
Although the "wish list" of weapons sales to Taiwan has been deleted from the original draft, this is not a source of great concern. On the contrary, since the original version was probably doomed in the Senate, the alterations may well turn out to be positive for Taiwan.
This sanguine outlook is, however, based on more than political tactics. In the first place, it is to be noted that nothing in the legislative process so far inhibits any particular arms deal. Nor in fact, is it necessarily appropriate for the Congress to try to specify in so much detail exactly what weapons systems could be offered. In the longer run, there would even be a risk that the list would be used as an excuse to exclude other systems, limiting Taiwan's flexibility in procurement of new and different armaments.
Even more importantly, the rest of the draft remains completely intact, and if anything somewhat strengthened. Its provisions for greater exchanges and contacts between the military establishments of of Taiwan and the US have been retained. These measures are, in themselves, at least as valuable as new weapons systems. Top quality training and information about how to use advanced weapons and about new warfighting doctrines are vital needs for Taiwan's military, and the TSEA would facilitate this significantly. Furthermore, the requirement to make Taiwan's weapons requests -- and their outcomes -- public will increase transparency and accountability, not only in Washington, but also at home, in defense budgeting and the acquisitions process.
Naturally, the Clinton administration has vociferously opposed the TSEA. Assistant Secretary of State Stanley Roth has even sarcastically labeled it the "Taiwan Security Destabilization Act." However, although disheartening in its predictability, the noise coming from the White House is mostly bluster, a show put on for China's benefit. Obviously, what the Clinton team really wants is for the issue to go away. They desperately hope to see the TSEA die in Congress, not out of any principled objection to it -- and we would be hard pressed to imagine one -- but because they are terrified of the prospect of being put on the spot in an election year. What could be worse, from their point of view, than being forced to choose between signing the bill, and risking the condemnation of the dictators in Beijing, or vetoing it, and finding themselves belabored with the same stick that Bill Clinton used against George Bush in 1992, the charge of coddling the butchers of Beijing.
It is too early for celebration, since the TSEA is still a long way from becoming law. At the very earliest, if the House passes the bill expeditiously, the Senate might take up the matter at the beginning of next year. Taiwan, its government and its friends in the US need to redouble their joint efforts in support of the bill, as it enters its most crucial stage. Taiwan's security deserves no less.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
RSS