With the fall of Kabul not yet six months past, Washington faces a fresh test of its ability to sustain Pax Americana, as more than 100,000 Russian troops, heavy artillery and tanks mass on Russia’s border with Ukraine. The mounting crisis looks set to become the greatest test of US President Joe Biden’s administration to date — the outcome of which could have far-reaching implications and send ripples through the Taiwan Strait.
Moscow’s Ukraine gambit appears designed to probe the Biden administration — to ferret out its red lines and ascertain whether Washington is willing to commit troops to defend its ally. In essence, the purpose is to determine whether Biden is all bark and no bite. There can be little doubt that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), who openly aspires to dethrone the US as the world’s pre-eminent power, is watching the unfolding events with keen interest.
During a White House news conference on Wednesday, Biden engaged in a rather eccentric form of diplomacy. He said: “My guess is that [Russian President Vladimir Putin] will move in [to Ukraine]” — appearing to have conceded the inevitability of an invasion while US Secretary of State Antony Blinken was in Kiev holding emergency talks in an effort to reach a diplomatic solution.
Nevertheless, Biden did say that should Russia use military force, the US would retaliate with stringent sanctions that could include cutting Russia off from the global banking system by blocking its use of SWIFT, the global interbank payment system. Were Biden to follow through with the threat, it would certainly give Beijing pause for thought. One of the Chinese Communist Party’s private fears is that Chinese banks could be cut off from access to the US dollar, which Chinese businesses rely on to conduct transactions outside of China’s borders due to the high volatility of the yuan. Removing or significantly limiting access to the US dollar would shake the foundations of China’s export-led economy and imperil its financial system.
If Russia were to annex Ukraine without meaningful repercussions, it could lead Xi, full of hubris from a victory in Hong Kong, to conclude that he now has a golden opportunity to annex Taiwan. US administrations, stretching back to that of former US president Barack Obama, have, in Beijing’s eyes, demonstrated that the US is war-weary and no longer has an appetite for foreign intervention. Ukraine’s annexation would reinforce the prevailing narrative among China’s leadership and intellectual class that the US is, if not in terminal decline, then at least re-entering a period of isolationism.
Some have criticized previous US administrations, as well as the EU, for having dangled the offer of NATO and EU membership before Ukraine, and for having encouraged the overthrow of Ukraine’s pro-Russian former president Viktor Yanukovych. Critics argue that Western leaders unnecessarily “poked the Russian bear” and forced the Kremlin to act to protect its sphere of influence. Others argue that the history of the 20th century shows that appeasement never works against strongman leaders such as Putin or unalloyed dictators like Xi — and that, prior to Russia’s 2014 invasion of Crimea, Putin had already used military force against Georgia.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the West’s policy toward Russia, the mounting Ukrainian crisis is certainly a headache that the US could do without. The last thing Washington and Taipei need is the US getting bogged down in another quagmire that saps limited resources and diverts attention from the Indo-Pacific region, its area of core strategic interest.
There are no easy answers to this crisis, and Washington has limited options to rein in Moscow. Taiwan can only watch from afar and hope that Putin steps back from the brink, while redoubling efforts to bolster its defenses against an increasingly emboldened China.
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed