The UN weapons inspection team has released its second report, stating that no weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq. The report has failed to provide grounds for the US, the UK and Australia to attack Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's regime. The number of countries supporting the US has also decreased. Moreover, it has triggered large-scale anti-war movements across the world. British Prime Minister Tony Blair's administration was also forced to support extending the inspection work.
Perhaps US President George W. Bush's administration should have first done more introspection before committing itself to brashness. Why has it faced so many obstacles domestically and internationally? The problem lies in the Bush administration's diplomatic direction, rather than Saddam's excellent diplomatic skills. On the one hand, the Bush administration has pursued"unilateralism" ever since it came to power. It has taken the US interest as a priority while putting other countries' opinions aside.
On the other hand, the US relies on using forcefulness to solve the Iraq problem. Nevertheless, the price of war is too high. All other countries believe that they should stop Iraq from developing weapons of mass destruction through the UN, and that they should not easily use force against Iraq if it's not absolutely necessary.
The Bush administration's insistence on using force against Iraq is self-injurious. First, US relations with many of its major allies have become tense today. France and Germany in Europe, as well as Saudi Arabia in the Middle East, have all been the US' important long-term allies. But these countries now have divergent views on the matter. Both the future operation of NATO and handling of Middle East affairs will be hampered if the US does not deal with the issue carefully.
Next, the global anti-terrorism alliance that the US put together after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks may split. Among the 15 UN Security Council members, France, Russia and China already oppose the US. Strong anti-US voices also surge from Europe to the Middle East and Southeast Asia. This will be a problem for the US war against terror in years to come.
The Bush administration is in a dilemma at the moment. If it insists on staging a war, it will be criticized for sending the army out without a righteous cause. This will worsen US relations with its allies and cause even larger-scale anti-war movements worldwide. But if it withdraws its army now, the US' prestige and credibility will be damaged.
Perhaps the Bush administration can do some damage control. The UN inspection work in Iraq has become more effective since the US sent its troops to the Persian Gulf region and threatened to overturn Saddam's regime. The Iraqi government has also made concessions and is now willing to cooperate with the UN inspection team, vowing to abide by the UN's ban on weapons of mass destruction. In other words, the US' tough stance has successfully helped reduce the threat of weapons of mass destruction, and it has also maintained the UN's authority and dignity.
The Bush administration should renegotiate with the UN Security Council members so as to deploy more long-term weapons inspectors in Iraq. It should also deploy a portion of its troops in Iraq's neighboring countries and closely monitor Saddam's regime. Under such circumstances, not only will the Bush administration's withdrawal of troops not damage its prestige and credibility, but it will unite the US and its allies and avoid killing in the Persian Gulf region.
Wang Kao-cheng is an associate professor in the Department of International Affairs and Strategic Studies at Tamkang University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means