As the US military lays down its weapons and completes a chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, thousands of kilometers away in Taiwan, media personality and Broadcasting Corp of China chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康) tossed a grenade into Taiwanese politics by saying that the nation has become overreliant on the US for defense.
Jaw, who is one of Taiwan’s most prominent pro-Beijing cheerleaders, added that Taiwan would follow in the footsteps of South Vietnam and Afghanistan in eventually being betrayed by Washington, and called on Taiwanese to take the calamity of the fall of Kabul as an object lesson.
Is Jaw correct? Can Taiwan really be lumped together with Afghanistan?
One crucial difference between the nations is that while the US has spent 20 years and spilled the blood of 2,300 American soldiers in Afghanistan, Taiwan is not a warzone, nor has it entered the preparatory stages for war, and there are no US troops stationed in the nation.
Taiwan’s situation could not be more different from Afghanistan’s.
The US has poured more than US$2.5 trillion into Afghanistan. This eye-watering military expenditure is the motivation for the pullout.
In contrast, Taiwan has been a long-term purchaser of US military equipment, and is therefore well and truly embedded into the thinking of the three elements that constitute the so-called “US military industrial complex”: arms manufacturers, defense officials and the US Congress. In other words, Taiwan’s security guarantees are embedded at a systemic level within Washington.
Additionally, from a geopolitical perspective, Taiwan’s pivotal position within the Pacific Ocean’s first island chain shows its immense strategic value to the US. The US-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security and other regional security agreements to which the US is a signatory also mean that if a war between Taiwan and China were to break out, the US would not be able to throw Taiwan to the wolves, even if it were inclined to.
Taiwan’s prowess in state-of-the-art semiconductor manufacturing places the nation at the heart of global supply chains. The global chip industry has been elevated to a first-tier strategic industry, first as a result of a US-China trade dispute and, second, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Any upheaval or instability in Taiwan would affect the entire global technology industry, initiating a domino effect through Europe, the US, Japan and other advanced economies.
Anyone who argues that today’s Afghanistan is tomorrow’s Taiwan is conflating two entirely separate situations and ignoring the factors at play. The US withdrawal from Afghanistan is simply the latest chapter in Washington’s strategic pivot to the Indo-Pacific region. Far from losing relevance, Taiwan’s strategic value is on the rise.
Fan Shuo-ming is a senior administrative specialist at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Edward Jones
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