I have been struck by recent moves out of Tokyo, particularly as they relate to Taiwan. It appears that Japan has decided to be more forthcoming about its support for Taiwan’s separate status, bringing it closer to Washington’s current stance — especially as regards the defense of the island. This comes after many years when the Japanese seemed constrained by Beijing’s rigid conception of the problem, which has sought to trap Tokyo in early post-World War II concepts. Yet today relations between Tokyo and Taipei seem to be flourishing. I note that former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe recently made an appearance at a forum in Taiwan via a video link and that there is talk of a possible visit by him next year. The current Prime Minister, Fumio Kishida, has also demonstrated his respect for Taiwan and its people in his early statements.
Unfortunately, the People’s Republic of China — and to a somewhat lesser extent Korea — continue to ground their foreign policy in outdated concepts. They act as if the war ended yesterday, and no amount of change or reconciliation is enough.
I view Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), the father of Taiwan democracy, as an example of the benevolent aspects of Japanese rule. Born in 1923, Lee grew up speaking fluent Japanese and was educated at Kyoto University during the war years. I recall visiting Lee at both his Taipei home and his country house in nearby Taoyuan. Lee would take me down into his extensive library, and proudly display his collection of Japanese language books. What came through is that President Lee had great respect for Japan and what it had done for Taiwan over the years. This even though Lee’s older brother had been conscripted into the Japanese army and died fighting for Japan in World War Two.
The history is well known. An assertive Japan began its military expansion over a hundred years ago and built a massive empire through force of arms. This ended with a crushing defeat by a multinational Allied force in 1945. The culminating blow was the dropping of two nuclear bombs on the island nation, forcing the militarists who had led the country down this doleful path to capitulate. The government that emerged embarked on a dramatically new course, foreswearing the use of force as a tool of foreign policy. All their colonial conquests — as well as a few pieces of traditional Japanese territory — were stripped away. Tokyo proceeded to build both a thriving democracy and a dynamic and innovative economy. Yes, there was a time when some skeptics scoffed at the expression “Made in Japan.” But before long the world was pounding a path to the land of the Rising Sun in pursuit of business and trade.
The wounds of World War II were lasting, particularly in colonized Korea and mainland China, but also throughout southeast Asia. However, I would argue that the statute of limitations has expired on the idea that Japan must forever be viewed as an unreconstructed militarist society.
The backdrop to the Japan-Taiwan warming has deep roots. A weak China ceded Taiwan to Japan after being defeated in a war in 1895. Over the following fifty years, Japan played an important, and largely positive, role in the development of my favorite Asian island. They methodically built dams, railroads, factories and schools across the island. Yes, at times their rule was harsh, particularly in suppressing local rebellions. This was especially the case for tribal settlements in Taiwan’s mountains, which were among the last to succumb to the outsiders’ invasion. I recall the abundance of Japanese tourists I would encounter at the Palace Museum, Taroko Gorge, and other points of interest when I lived in Taiwan. On a lighter note, the Japanese introduced baseball to the island, and it is one of the most popular sports there to this day.
This warming trend is significant from the geo-political perspective. Should the mainland escalate its aggression against Taiwan through force of arms, America’s longstanding military support for the island would undoubtedly come into play. But any successful defense of Taiwan would of necessity require at a minimum logistical support from Japan. Our military bases in Japan would have to play a central role in — and successful counter to — PRC aggression across the Taiwan Strait.
The real solution to this festering problem would be a dramatic shift in the attitude of Beijing’s leaders toward Taiwan. It is time they stop relitigating the Second World War and develop a more temperate policy toward Taipei. The existence of extensive Taiwan investments on the mainland, as well as a thriving tourist business, could serve as a springboard to such a shift. But until this happens, the authoritarian leaders in Beijing should be under no illusions that the United States would stand idly by if China provoked conflict in the Taiwan Strait, quite possibly with Japanese assistance.
Ambassador Stephen M. Young (ret.) lived in Kaohsiung as a boy over 50 years ago, and served in AIT four times: as a young consular officer (1981-’82), as a language student (1989-’90), as Deputy Director (1998-2001) and as Director (2006-’9). He visits often and writes regularly about Taiwan matters. Young was also US Ambassador to Kyrgyzstan and Consul General to Hong Kong during his 33-year career as a foreign service officer. He has a BA from Wesleyan University and a PhD from the University of Chicago.
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
RSS