The question of whether China Airlines should buy aircraft from Boeing or Airbus is creating controversy in Taiwan. There is nothing unusual about such a dispute. What is strange, however, is that while controversy rages and the US and Europe have gotten involved, no one has pointed out that China has taken the use of what we might call "aircraft-purchase diplomacy" to the extreme, buying more than 100 planes over the last 10 years.
Since the Tiananmen massacre China has used various aircraft purchases to sow dissension between the US and Europe in order to break its own diplomatic isolation. Every time the US would discuss whether to continue granting China most-favored-nation status, or when Chinese leaders are about to visit the US and expect to be pressured on human-rights issues, Beijing has tried to pressure the US by waving aircraft orders around.
Orders for Boeing aircraft have been an important part of this strategy, and Boeing has therefore lobbied the White House, stressing the importance of Sino-US relations. To break out of the difficult situation created by the boycott by major Western nations of former premier Li Peng (
Unificationists in Taiwan have never blamed China for its total politicization of trade. But with China making every effort to sideline Taiwan diplomatically, these people have become righteousness personified, blaming the government for trying to find ways of making an aircraft purchase improve Taiwan's diplomatic situation. In the end, their argument is just an attempt to help China isolate Taiwan by sowing discord between Taiwan and the West.
They say that by buying aircraft from the US, Taiwan is turning France into an enemy. Isn't this tantamount to sowing discord between Taiwan and France? Why would the loss of one single contract turn France into an enemy? Apart from these 10 planes, are there no other
factors influencing the relationship between Taiwan and France? Is there no other possible business to be done between Taiwan and France, no other areas where the two can cooperate?
These unificationists argue that Taiwan is a US pawn, a bastard son of America. They forget that if it weren't for US military and US economic aid, or for the US Seventh Fleet patrolling the Taiwan Strait, they would have become the bastard sons of China a long time ago and some of them might even have met an early death. For them to now talk about pawns and bastard sons is not just a matter of sowing dissension between Taiwan and the US, it is also a matter of ingratitude.
Right now, who would like nothing more than a severing of ties between Taiwan and the US? Who is it who would dearly love to see an end to relations between Taiwan and Europe? China, of course. It is incomprehensible that these people undermine Taiwan while calling themselves Taiwanese.
Today, the US is Taiwan's most powerful ally. When China carried out military exercises aimed at Taiwan, even firing missiles over the island, other countries were afraid to say anything. It was the US that dispatched an aircraft carrier to put an end to China's provocations.
When China continues to expand its weapons arsenal in an attempt to attack Taiwan, European countries are afraid to sell arms to Taiwan and the US is the only one providing Taipei with new arms. The Taiwan Relations Act guarantees the relationship between the US and Taiwan. This guarantee is important for Tai-wan's security. What legislation have other countries passed?
In this situation, it is of course necessary to consider US interests as much as possible. As long as Boeing doesn't offer a ridiculously high price and as long as there aren't any major quality concerns over Boeing aircraft, Taiwan should buy from Boeing. This does not mean a severing of relations with France, however. As for violating WTO principles of "political intervention," isn't the Europeans' failure to sell arms to Taiwan also a form of political intervention?
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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