Reports HAVE indicated that the US is planning to halt arms sales to Taiwan, and it is meaningless to discuss responsibility at this stage of the game. Perhaps the government should start brainstorming and try to come up with some ways to coax the White House to change it’s mind.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and key national security officials have been more active recently in talks with the US about arms sales. They know that if US President George W. Bush’s administration freezes arms sales to Taiwan, they will face even greater difficulty restarting sales after the election of either Republican presidential candidate John McCain or Democrat rival Barack Obama.
In the past, the Democrats have approved fewer arms deals with Taiwan than the Republicans. Theoretically, a US president should decide the time, quality and quantity of arms sales in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act.
However, the US president has great discretionary powers. Therefore, even if he does nothing, he does not violate the law. Take former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, both Democrats. They seldom sold advanced weapons to Taiwan and Clinton even considered temporarily stopping all sales of weapon parts to Taiwan after then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) made his controversial “state-to-state” statement.
As for Republican presidents, although Ronald Reagan was forced to sign the 1982 Sino-US Joint Communique; because of changes in the international situation, he still sold a number of important weapons systems to Taiwan and allowed Taiwan to build the Indigenous Defense Fighter with US help. In addition, George Bush sold Taiwan F-16A/Bs and E-2T early warning aircraft and George W. Bush approved eight arms deals at once.
Washington has been sending various messages through different channels, making it safe to say that the US is not interested in blocking arms sales to Taiwan. On the contrary, the US wants the Ma administration to officially declare its stance on arms procurement.
First of all, American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Director Stephen Young has been in close contact with leaders of both the pan-blue and pan-green camps, making every effort to push through arms sales. The alleged misunderstanding between Taipei and Washington is a great insult to Young. Washington sent former White House chief of staff Andrew Card to congratulate Ma at his inauguration and AIT Chairman Raymond Burghardt has visited Taiwan twice since the presidential election. Washington should understand Ma’s determination to increase Taiwan’s defense budget to 3 percent of GDP and his stance on arms sales.
During former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) administration, Chen purposely tied the three most expensive arms deals together: submarines, anti-submarine aircraft and Patriot missiles.
The Democratic Progressive Party even talked about selling government-owned land and issuing government bonds to finance the procurements. The pan-blue camp had no choice but to boycott the deals and some US officials took this to mean that they were against arms sales. Through partisan negotiations, the legislature finally passed a three-in-one procurement package after reducing the total value and establishing an annual budget for it. It is highly unlikely that Washington is unaware of the budget the legislature passed.
When Chen pushed for the UN membership referendum ahead of the presidential election, the Bush administration refused to sell F-16C/Ds and froze other arms sales to Taiwan, so as not to affect Sino-US cooperation and to avoid escalating the North Korean nuclear crisis. However, things are different now. The US sincerely hopes that Taiwan can strengthen its defense capabilities and therefore it should not freeze arms sales. Otherwise, why would Ma increase Taiwan’s defense budget?
The US hopes that Taiwan will strengthen its defense capacity on the one hand, while improving cross-strait relations on the other. From its own experience, Washington knows that national strength is the biggest bargaining chip in negotiations. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal last month, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that as Taiwan improves relations with China, we must not forget that the US is still an important ally of Taiwan. Her comment was made intentionally to show that arms sales to Taiwan remain open. Beijing is trying to “systematize” the freeze of arms sales through US Ambassador to China Clark Randt and Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Yang Jiechi (楊潔箎). China has always wanted to interfere with US arms sales to Taiwan and would certainly stick its nose in given the chance. Nevertheless, in accordance with Reagan’s six assurances to Taipei, Washington must not allow Beijing to interfere with arms deals between the US and Taiwan.
Based on past experience, when the US makes a decision, it can simply inform Taiwan without giving any explanation. Yet Washington allowed Ma to send key security, military and diplomatic officials to participate in the Taiwan-US military meeting in Monterey, California, which opened on Monday. It has also allowed a delegation from the Foreign and National Defense Committee of the Legislative Yuan to visit Washington and meet US security and defense officials later this month, showing that the US has not closed the door on arms sales to Taiwan.
It is difficult for Taiwan to make its stance on arms sales known because we do not have control over the matter. Taiwan should not allow Washington to demand sky-high prices or offer weapons systems that do not meet our defense needs. Making Washington understand Taiwan’s determination and need for improving our military without hurting the long-term friendship between the US and Taiwan will require great diplomatic and political skill.
Edward Chen is a professor in Tamkang University’s Graduate Institute of American Studies.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then