Under political pressure from the US, the EU has finally agreed to delay lifting its arms embargo on China. Given that UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, who enjoys a good relationship with Washington, is to take over the six-month presidency of the EU in the latter part of this year, we can expect that the arms ban will not be lifted during this period. The EU will not sell arms to China until at least next year.
In addition, the New York Times quoted EU officials as stating that another major factor in the decision was China's enactment of the "Anti-Secession" Law, which, they said, introduced complications.
This is good news for Taiwan, and if the special arms budget bill goes through due to compromises in the legislature, Taiwan will be able to be on a more equal footing with China for a number of years to come. If, in addition, the US continues to play a leading role in maintaining security in the Asia-Pacific region, and dissuades the EU from engaging in such activities for the short term, Taiwan need not be concerned about the Anti-Secession Law's threat for the time being.
But what about the longer-term outlook?
Clearly, US pressure on Europe will not work indefinitely. The EU doesn't want to sell arms to China merely to generate revenue from these sales. It also wants to curry favor with Beijing to secure smoother business transactions. Commercial interests can be very persuasive, and this issue cannot be decided by diplomats and national security experts alone. Elected governments face pressure from the electorate as well as interest groups.
Previously, Taiwan purchased arms from European countries whose governments could not refuse, as these deals supported weapons companies that were facing bankruptcy.
Because France sold arms to Taiwan, China did not allow it to bid for the contract to build the Guangzhou Metro. China also boycotted the adoption of Japan's Shinkansen bullet train after it gave a visa to former president Lee Teng-hui (
Money talks in the international community, and there are no long-term guarantees on security issues simply based on ties of loyalty. In the last few decades Taiwan has been quite adept at securing the advantage for itself by playing the situation, and this is in fact one of the major factors contributing to its continued development. In all honesty, Taiwan cannot demand that the EU keep its arms embargo on China.
Remember, Taiwan took advantage of European sanctions on Beijing after Tiananmen to get first dibs on the Chinese market, dropping sanctions just like Japan did. Taiwan's economy might well be in dire straits now if it weren't for that move into China at the end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s.
It is wrong for Taiwan to rely on the goodwill of the US, Japan and the EU, for this goodwill is at the mercy of considerations of interest. Without strength, Taiwan has nothing to give them in exchange. Therefore, when considering whether Taiwan should stop talks with China on direct flights, or on other commercial activities, we should think about what is good for us. Naturally, direct flights would be of mutual advantage. If we sacrifice direct flights to protest the Anti-Secession Law, we should give some thought to which side will be losing the most.
Ku Er-teh is a freelance writer.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS