The success of US President Joe Biden’s Summit for Democracy is best shown by the reaction of the two leading authoritarian governments that were not invited to participate and were its main targets.
On Dec. 9, the first day of the virtual meeting, the China Daily, the propaganda organ of the Chinese Communist Party, carried no fewer than five articles disparaging it.
The week before, the Chinese and Russian ambassadors to the US published a rare joint letter lambasting Washington’s two-day event.
They called it “an evident product of its Cold War mentality [that would] stoke up ideological confrontation and a rift in the world, creating new ‘dividing lines.’”
The letter trumpeted communist China’s “extensive, whole-process socialist democracy [that] reflects the people’s will, suits the country’s realities, and enjoys strong support from the people.”
It also praised Russia, calling it “a democratic federative law-governed state with a republican form of government.”
The angry defensiveness and patently hollow democratic claims of the two dictatorships alone paid geopolitical dividends. By striking a highly sensitive nerve, the summit — with its emphasis on political accountability, rule of law and human rights — also dramatized the terminal vulnerability of the two autocratic systems.
Whenever the US, for all its imperfections, is debating political freedom with dictatorial regimes that falsely claim the mantle of democracy, it is winning and they are losing. That should suggest that a sustained, long-term war of ideas designed to end those tyrannies is as effective as the ideological confrontation of the Cold War that terminated the Soviet “Evil Empire” and eastern Europe’s communist regimes.
After the summit, Biden unfortunately missed the unique opportunity to demonstrate the US’ commitment to one of the pair of democracies targeted for destruction by the world’s two leading despots.
He had a two-hour telephone conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss the menacing situation on the Ukraine border, where almost 120,000 Russian troops are poised to invade.
Biden said he warned Putin that if he pulled the trigger, he would be met with unprecedented economic sanctions.
“I made it very clear, if ... he invades Ukraine there will be severe consequences ... economic consequences like none he’s ever seen, or ever have been seen,” he said, adding that Putin “got the message.”
Regrettably, Putin also received other, more welcome messages from Biden — that Washington has no intention of defending Ukraine militarily: “[T]he idea that the United States is going to unilaterally use force to confront Russia invading Ukraine is not in the cards right now.”
His disavowal of “unilateral” US intervention suggested Washington might still act, “depend[ing] upon what the rest of the NATO countries were willing to do.”
However, the prospect that Washington might follow another nation’s lead, rather than play its customary leadership role, effectively meant Western force is off the table, and Ukraine would be on its own in a direct conflict with Russia.
It undoubtedly was music to Putin’s ears, vindicating his expectation that the Afghanistan debacle showed the current flaccid state of US and Western willingness to use force to defend even critical security partners.
Biden did not mention another Russian move that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has said he fears, based on intelligence reports last month: a coup to overthrow Ukraine’s government.
Biden announced he would have a telephone conversation with Zelenskiy the next day, but he increased regional anxieties by also saying he would convene a session with Putin and “at least four NATO allies,” but not others, to determine what “accommodations” might be made to “bring down the temperature on the eastern front” — possibly by reducing US military exercises in Europe.
A Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs official said: “Of course this bothers us, although we are not surprised by this approach.”
Given Putin’s unyielding demands on NATO, Ukraine and other neighboring countries, Biden’s announcement raised concerns that some kind of US concessionary deal cooked up with Putin might be afoot.
It evoked the moment in 2012 when then-US president Barack Obama whispered to then-Russian president Dmitri Medvedev that on missile defense and other issues, he should tell Putin he would “have more flexibility ... after my election.”
It also parallels earlier concerns of Taiwan, under severe threat from China, that Washington might negotiate its fate over its head. That prompted then-US president Ronald Reagan to issue his “six assurances” in 1982 promising not to take any unilateral actions adverse to Taiwan.
If similar assurances were in place for Ukraine, Biden would already be in contravention of most of them.
“The United States would not consult with China in advance before making decisions about US arms sales to Taiwan,” one assurance reads.
Washington is surely “consulting” with Moscow and has inexplicably delayed sending Ukraine vitally needed weapons to deter or defend against a Russian attack.
“The United States would not mediate between Taiwan and China,” another assurance reads.
Biden clearly seems to be “mediating” between Russia and Ukraine — and between Russia and NATO about Ukraine — rather than rejecting outright all Russian claims to Ukraine’s territory and sovereign independence, and defending Ukraine’s right to join NATO, the EU or any other organization it chooses.
“The United States would not alter its position about the sovereignty of Taiwan ... and would not pressure Taiwan to enter into negotiations with China,” another of the commitments says.
Biden is explicitly pressing Ukraine to negotiate with Russia.
“The United States would not formally recognize Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan,” the fourth pledge reads.
Washington is perilously close to formally acquiescing to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and accepting its claims to eastern Ukraine as a basis for regional “peace.”
When the White House announced its plans for a Summit for Democracy, it not only fulfilled a Biden campaign pledge, but also helped to bring the US back to its place as democracy’s leading exponent.
It stated as the first objective of the summit: “Strengthening democracy and defending against authoritarianism.”
Beyond the eloquent messages delivered prior to and during the meeting, US action to defend Ukraine — and Taiwan — will prove the ultimate demonstration of that commitment.
Joseph Bosco, who served as China country director in the office of the US secretary of defense, is a fellow of the Institute for Taiwan-American Studies and a member of the Global Taiwan Institute’s advisory committee.
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
Lockheed Martin on Tuesday responded to concerns over delayed shipments of F-16V Block 70 jets, saying it had added extra shifts on its production lines to accelerate progress. The Ministry of National Defense on Monday said that delivery of all 66 F-16V Block 70 jets — originally expected by the end of next year — would be pushed back due to production line relocations and global supply chain disruptions. Minister of National Defense Wellington Koo (顧立雄) said that Taiwan and the US are working to resolve the delays, adding that 50 of the aircraft are in production, with 10 scheduled for flight
Victory in conflict requires mastery of two “balances”: First, the balance of power, and second, the balance of error, or making sure that you do not make the most mistakes, thus helping your enemy’s victory. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has made a decisive and potentially fatal error by making an enemy of the Jewish Nation, centered today in the State of Israel but historically one of the great civilizations extending back at least 3,000 years. Mind you, no Israeli leader has ever publicly declared that “China is our enemy,” but on October 28, 2025, self-described Chinese People’s Armed Police (PAP) propaganda
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
RSS