"Sometimes tempers flare [in Taiwan] and in such a way that it could trigger unintentional consequences," were the words yesterday of US Senator John Warner, a Republican from Virginia.
The senator was delivering a thinly veiled warning to Taiwan during a committee meeting on the Asia-Pacific region. While questioning the commander of the US Pacific Command, Admiral Timothy Keating, the senator made it clear that he did not want to see "provocative" acts by Taiwan.
Warner's comments come amid a flurry of such utterances by US officials, including Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, who on April 12 warned both China and Taiwan to refrain from provocations ahead of next year's Olympics in Beijing.
It is de rigueur for US officials to talk about "maintaining the status quo" and to give impromptu lectures on the nuances of the "one China" policy and the Taiwan Relations Act.
But Warner, with his comments to Keating, took direct aim at Taiwan.
"I hope Taiwan recognizes that the United States of America is heavily engaged militarily worldwide. And we do not need another problem in that region [the Asia-Pacific]," Warner said.
"So I hope they don't try to play the Taiwan Relations card to their advantage," he said.
Unfortunately, Warner's insistence on singling out Taiwan highlights two of the most fundamental problems that this nation faces in its dealings with US policymakers.
The first is a basic misunderstanding by many US policymakers and academics of what motivates Taiwanese politicians and drives local politics.
If Taiwanese politicians are saying and doing things that Washington or Beijing find irritating, it is the height of arrogance to assume that they are doing it simply because their "tempers flare."
The theatrics in the Legislative Yuan, the perpetual protests and TV talk shows may lend credence to the suspicion that Taiwanese politicians are immature troublemakers (often they are), but they must be interpreted within the context of local politics.
It was not rash anger that drove President Chen Shui-bian (
Meanwhile, the same goes for parts of the pan-blue camp (especially the People First Party) when they oppose procuring US weapons systems. These politicians aren't motivated by ire; they're motivated by a desire to keep their jobs by retaining supporters.
The second problem that Warner's comments highlight is a perception among some people that Taiwan's de facto independence -- and not China's questionable claim to Taiwan as part of its territory -- is the source of friction in the Taiwan Strait.
This little fallacy needs to be put down as quickly as possible.
Taiwan is not the problem. The Taiwanese people are not the problem. No one in Taiwan is seriously calling for the military to invade China (at least, not anymore). No one in Taiwan is threatening to wipe US cities from the map. No one in Taiwan is even saying that they would be willing to watch millions of Chinese die, simply for the sake of hollow pride.
Now take a look at China. There are some encouraging voices in the wilderness, people who call for calm and restraint. But there are just as many officials in China who thunder for blood, death and destruction. There are plenty of politicians in China who are willing to build their careers and their legacy on a mountain of skulls.
Senator Warner, at the end of the day, it isn't Taiwan that threatens war; it is China.
So why warn Taiwan about being "provocative"?
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS