After receiving several visitors -- from former envoys to the high priest of Beijing's foreign policy, Qian Qichen (錢其琛) -- Washing-ton acknowledged that Beijing appears inclined to use intimidation to attain its foreign policy goals. This acknowledgement is noteworthy as the US makes its decision this month on the arms package it will sell to Taiwan. Bush should stand firm on arms sales for three reasons.
First, arms sales are essential to building a policy of constructive engagement. Since the 1990s, scholars have been looking for a better policy toward China than the policies of containment and engagement. Constructive engagement seems to be the choice of the mainstream.
Michael O'Hanlon, an analyst at the Brookings Institute, has pointed out that "a pattern of increasing openness, increasing engagement, has been the norm," referring to Washington's relations with Beijing.
In 1998, then president Bill Clinton asserted the so-called "three no's" policy in which the US did not support an independent Taiwan; one China, one Taiwan or two Chinas; or Taiwan's entry into any international organization requiring statehood. No other US president had made such a strong, detailed public declaration circumscribing Taiwan's status. Some US scholars, including those often sympathetic to Beijing, have argued that the three no's policy tilted too far toward China. In addition to being silent about this policy, Bush could adopt a more flexible policy by maintaining the right to sell arms to Taiwan.
Second, arms sales are essential to maintaining the military balance in the Taiwan Strait. When mentioning the Aegis radar system, Qian said "If weapons were sold to that region, it would be like adding fuel to the fire." He also reportedly said during his visit, that China would not rule out the use of force against Taiwan, if the US decided to sell it the Aegis system.
Beijing has never shown its willingness to abandon the use of force against Taipei. Taiwan is seeking to purchase weapons from the US to defend itself rather than to pursue a cross-strait arms race. Washington's arms sales to Taipei will not be a threat to Beijing. Bush should, therefore, be straightforward in defending the sales.
Furthermore, China recently announced its largest increase in military spending in 12 years, a rise of US$17 billion, or 17.7 percent. A report released in March said Beijing had deployed at least 200 DF-15 and DF-21 missiles in the provinces facing Taiwan and that number is expected to reach 650 in five years. Taipei's demand for more sophisticated weapons is prompted by Beijing's threat.
Admiral Dennis Blair, commander-in-chief of the US Pacific Command, said recently that the military balance of power between China and Taiwan had remained unchanged over the past year. He also said, however, "My recommendation is to take the actions necessary to maintain that balance."
In the face of the growing threat from Beijing, arms sales to Taiwan have become one of the necessary actions the US should take. It should make its decision according to its assessment of Taiwan's security and regional stability requirements.
Third, arms sales are essential to Washington's ability to show its will to play the role of a global power. Bush is being put to the test. Robert Kagan, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, points out that, "If Bush now listens to his father's old advisers and decides to avoid a confrontation with Beijing over Taiwan arms sales this year, Chinese leaders could conclude that he won't stand up to them when a real crisis comes."
Chin's Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan (唐家璇) urged the US to "rein in its wild horse" behavior toward Taiwan. According to the Taiwan Relations Act, however, the US must satisfy Taiwan's need to defend itself, without consulting with Beijing over what weapons systems it will allow to be sold.
If Taiwan is to unite with China someday, it must move in accordance with the will of its people. Before then, Taiwan has the right to maintain the status quo. Washington's arms sales can achieve this goal, which not only benefits Taiwan and the US, but China as well.
Antonio Hsiang is assistant professor at the Graduate Institute for Latin American Studies at Tamkang University.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS