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
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS