Since the 19th century, the strategic framework of the Asia-Pacific region has long displayed a competitive situation between maritime and continental powers.
In the post-Cold War era, the disintegration of the Soviet Union allowed China to replace it as the predominant naval power in Asia. Following the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the strategic cooperation among the US, Japan and China has gradually become a strategic competition. This change is a manifestation of the Asia-Pacific strategic situation's return to confrontation between maritime and continental powers.
Taiwan is situated between the Pacific Ocean and the Asian continent, and also Northeast and Southeast Asia. This is also the meeting point of the Asia-Pacific and the Eurasian continental powers. Taiwan's historical experience -- including several regime changes and its current restraint by the international community -- ? is a reflection of the international strategic framework that surrounds cross-strait issues.
Since none of the concerned parties are unwilling to forsake Taiwan, Taiwanese people's freedom of action is bound to be restricted, but this is also an indication that the Taiwan issue is a crucial factor in driving efforts toward achieving a strategic balance in the Asia-Pacific.
In strategic interactions between the US and Japan, the US-Japan alliance represents the force of Asia-Pacific sea power. At the beginning of the post-Cold War era, the alliance experienced a period of drift, but as China's challenge to the current Asia-Pacific situation became evident after superseding the former Soviet Union as the region's main continental power, the goals of the US-Japan alliance have become more defined.
The alliance has evolved from a security pact focused on defending Japan to taking a managing role in the Asia-Pacific region.
The US-Japan Joint Declaration on Security made last month listed cross-strait peace as an issue of joint concern. This shows that the US-Japan alliance has broadened its vision to include the whole region, or the whole world. This implies that with the mighty force of maritime power, the alliance wants to shape the Asia-Pacific strategic order to the benefit of maritime democracies.
Another crucial factor in influencing the strategic framework for the Asia-Pacific region is China. Anti-Russian, China was seen as an ally by the US-Japan alliance during the Cold World era. However, when the Cold War ended, China instead began to view the alliance as an enemy.
Beijing's move to inaugurate the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in Shanghai and develop cooperative ties with Pakistan, Myanmar and Russia clearly showed that it was attempting to counterbalance the maritime powers in the Asia-Pacific region by consolidating its ties with continental powers in Asia.
Therefore, the confrontational situation between maritime and continental powers that existed in Asia during the Cold War continues to exist.The maritime forces -- represented by the US-Japan alliance -- ?and continental forces -- represented by China -- ? congregate and confront one another in the Taiwan Strait. Although we are faced with a rising China, this has also made Taiwan a player in the setting of the political agenda on cross-strait issues. This is mainly because of the progress it has made in democratization.
The democratization in Taiwan has not only linked the country to post-Cold War global mainstream values, but has also allowed Taiwanese public opinion and social forces to become an integral part of developing diplomatic ties with other nations. This has not only made the international foreign policy elite fail to restrict the future of Taiwan by keeping the nation's leadership in check, but also the policies they designed for Taiwan will be directly reviewed by the Taiwanese.
Beijing's enactment of the "Anti-Secession" Law shows that its leadership fears Taiwan's democratic progress and wants to restrict it. Beijing also wants to restrain the US-Japan alliance's role in the region, especially from defining the status quo in the Taiwan Strait.
Since the new law directly involves the confrontation between maritime forces and continental forces as well Taiwan's democratic development, it impacts the strategic framework in the Asia-Pacific and on the sustainability of democratic development in the region. That is why the US, Japan and Taiwan have reacted fiercely to the matter.
The law has revealed to the Chinese people the nature of the Communist regime of Chinese President Hu Jintao (
It also shows that China has no intention of co-existing peacefully with Taiwan and rather sees the Taiwan question as a remnant of the civil war.
The Hu-Wen leadership is more like a Chinese version of Russian President Vladimir Putin's leadership instead of a regime that spread new ideas and ended East-West tensions during the era of former Russian president Mikhail Gorbachev.
Taiwan's reaction to the law is going to become a crucial factor in deciding whether or not the law is going to be effective. If the Taiwanese are united and take concrete measures to demonstrate their undaunted courage against China's military coercion, not only does it mean we have passed a significant test for democratic progress in our society but also we have constructed new civic unity.
This will also establish a foothold for international pro-democracy forces in the region. If we keep trying to blame each other or limit ourselves and beg for mercy in order not to anger China, the international community will be unable to come to our aid and the Red Terror will eventually reduce Taiwan to silence. If Taiwan is deprived of its democracy, its future will be even more tragic than Hong Kong's.
Lin Chia-lung is the former director-general of the Government Information Office.
Translated by Daniel Cheng and Lin Ya-ti
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS