During US President Barack Obama’s seven-day visit to Japan, South Korea, Malaysia and Philippines, the issue of security cooperation was at the fore. As other East Asian countries are worried about China copying what Russia is doing in Ukraine, Obama’s trip through the “first island chain” sent a message to US allies in the Asia-Pacific region that restored some faith in Washington’s rebalancing policy.
Although Obama only passed over the nation’s airspace, it is safe to say that unless Taiwan plans to surrender to China and resist Washington, the US’ regional strengthening of military cooperation is a positive thing for stability and security in the Taiwan Strait.
Obama sent signals that Taiwan must attend to, although considering the actions of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his government, these signals might have a negative impact on the nation. They include Obama’s support for Japan strengthening its right to self-defense and US support for the Philippines’ filing for international arbitration to handle territorial disputes in the South China Sea.
While Obama disapproved of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe sending a ritual offering to the Yasukuni Shrine, the US does not associate that with militarism. The US believes that Japan is a peaceful country and it is central to Washington developing bilateral alliances in a multipolar Asia-Pacific region.
However, the Ma administration is in accord with China’s anti-Japanese sentiment, which interprets Japan’s normalization as a move toward restoring militarism. This is not only out of touch with reality, but also contrary to the US’ policy of encouraging allies to upgrade their military strength and is unhelpful to national interests or the improvement of Taipei-Tokyo relations.
Another potential problem is linked to US support for the Philippines filing for international arbitration. In late March, the Philippines requested that the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, review whether China’s “nine-dash line” — which China uses for its territorial claims in the South China Sea — is in line with international law. The request has been accepted and Obama applauded the move for being in sync with Washington’s desire that territorial disputes in the area be handled in a peaceful manner and in line with international law.
Developments suggest it is possible that China’s nine-dash line will be ruled a violation of international law. Because the Ma administration has proposed a “U-shaped line” — which is extremely similar to the nine-dash line — for dealing with territorial disputes in the area, the US has said that Taiwan should form a claim different to China’s. However, the Ma administration, insisting that cross-strait relations be conducted under the concept of “one country, two areas” (一國兩區), has rejected this suggestion.
If the nine-dash line is ruled a violation of international law, then the U-shaped line will also be negated. Since Taiwan is unable to take part in negotiations on territorial disputes in the South China Sea, if the nation’s claim is judged to be illegal and it is unable to come up with a ( claim) that is in line with international law, then the entire basis for the claim to Itu Aba Island (Taiping Island, 太平島) the largest of the disputed Spratly Islands, also known as the Nansha Islands (南沙群島), will cease to exist.
Taiwan should capitalize on the US government’s rebalancing policy and propose a stance on territorial disputes in the South China Sea different to that of China’s nine-dash line. It is fine to disputes claims to Itu Aba Island, but if the nation loses the island, national interests will be severely hurt.
Lai I-chung is an executive committee member of the Taiwan Thinktank.
Translated by Drew Cameron
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