At a policy seminar at the Global Taiwan Institute in Washington on Wednesday last week, former American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) director Stephen Young announced that a detachment of US Marines will be posted at the AIT’s new compound in Taipei’s Neihu District (內湖) once the move from the institute’s current premises is completed later this year.
Although the primary reason that the US stations marines at its overseas missions is to protect and uphold the security of its staff and assets, Young said that it will be “a symbolic expression” of the US’ commitment to its “friends in Taiwan.”
The decision would not alter the Taiwan-US diplomatic relationship in any material way. Nevertheless, the stationing of marines in Taiwan carries symbolic meaning and, in this sense, can be seen as a significant development.
Ever since former US president Jimmy Carter established formal diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China (PRC), high-level contacts between Taiwanese and US officials have been strictly off-limits.
A year after the US severed diplomatic ties with Taiwan, Taiwan’s representative office in Washington attempted to invite the politically non-sensitive then-US secretary of agriculture to the office’s National Day reception, but it was blocked by the White House. It was not until former US president Ronald Reagan’s administration that the status of US officials attending the representative office’s annual reception began to gradually increase.
On Aug. 17, 1982, Reagan signed a joint communique with China, in which the US pledged to gradually reduce arms sales to Taiwan. However, one month prior to the signing of the communique, the Reagan administration had introduced the “six assurances” to the US Congress, which include a guarantee of continued US arms sales to Taiwan and an assurance that the US will not change its “long-standing” position regarding Taiwan’s sovereignty.
In 1992, before leaving office, then-US president George H. W. Bush cited the ending of the Cold War as a justification to sell Taiwan US-made F-16A/B jets and E-2 Hawkeye early warning aircraft.
In 1994, then-US president Bill Clinton agreed to the US Department of State’s proposal to adjust its Taiwan policy by changing the name of the Coordination Council for North American Affairs to the Taiwan Economic and Cultural Representative Office, and in doing so substantially elevated the Taiwan-US relationship.
In 2001, then-US president George W. Bush sold military hardware to Taiwan on a large scale, demonstrating the US’ commitment to assisting Taiwan in defending itself. Since 2005, the US has stationed military attaches at the AIT in Taipei, although they maintain a low profile and do not wear military uniforms.
In 2011, then-US secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton made a speech in Hawaii, where she said that Taiwan is an “important security and economic partner” to the US. This was by far the most significant strategic reassurance that the US has provided Taiwan since the break of formal diplomatic ties in 1979.
Last year, then-US president Barack Obama signed into law the US National Defense Authorization Act, for the first time authorizing military exchanges between senior Taiwanese and US military personnel in uniform.
The decision to post US Marines at the AIT in Taipei is certainly not a major breakthrough, but it does contain several positive signs for the development of political and military relationships between Taiwan and the US.
First, it is standard practice for the US to garrison a detachment of marines at its embassies throughout the world. Prior to the breaking of Taiwan-US diplomatic relations, the US had a contingent of marines at its embassy in Taiwan.
Washington’s decision to recommence the stationing of marines at its mission in Taipei and to construct a marine house intended to function as a social center demonstrates that it intends to extend to Taiwan the treatment it gives other nations. There is a political aspect to this decision.
Second, in addition to their primary function of providing security for diplomatic staff, marines are also tasked with anti-terrorism work.
US President Donald Trump recently gave the Pentagon one month to formulate a strategy for attacking the Islamic State group in addition to other military plans to fight terrorist groups around the world.
Furthermore, Obama has called Taiwan an ally in the global effort to combat terrorism. Will Trump demand that Taiwan provide a greater contribution to the global “war on terror”? Taiwanese policymakers should think about this.
Finally, the marines stationed at the AIT will carry loaded weapons and wear military uniforms, which is different from US military attaches who, while in Taiwan, wear civilian clothes.
However, Taiwanese will have to wait and see whether the Trump administration will increase the quality and quantity of arms sales to Taiwan, deploy the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense anti-ballistic missile system to Taiwan or substantially elevate the Taiwan-US relationship in other ways.
Edward Chen is a chair professor in Chinese Culture University’s political science department.
Translated by Edward Jones
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS