Having annexed the Sudetenland in October 1938, Nazi Germany went on to take over the whole of Czechoslovakia in March 1939. Then-British prime minister Neville Chamberlain on March 31 declared that if Germany attacked Poland, Britain would feel bound to lend Poland all the support within its power, and an Anglo-Polish agreement was signed on the same day.
On Sept. 1, 1939, Germany did invade Poland, and the UK declared war on Germany two days later.
However, Britain’s “support” was only to fight the relatively weak German navy in the Atlantic, rather than opening the more important Baltic Sea route. Poland soon became an occupied state and was partitioned under the Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, otherwise known as the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.
Returning to the present, on Jan. 15, historian Niall Ferguson delivered an online keynote speech at a forum organized by the Taipei School of Economics and Political Science. Ferguson is a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, a former professor of history at Harvard University, New York University and the London School of Economics and Political Science, and a former senior research fellow at the University of Oxford.
In 2004, he was named as one of Time magazine’s 100 most influential people, and his opinions on foreign policy are widely respected.
In his speech, Ferguson said that although the US has over the past three or four years repeatedly amplified its spoken promises to Taiwan, they might not have the desired effect, and it is risky to only rely on spoken pledges.
What happened to Poland in 1939 shows that even when there is a concrete commitment, or a specific signed agreement, it is just as risky as when there is only a verbal commitment, and perhaps more so. With verbal commitments, people still have some sense of uncertainty about the future. This heightens anxiety, leading them to act decisively and appropriately in the face of an immediate threat.
The Yom Kippur War waged by Egypt and Syria against Israel in October 1973 showed that when an enemy begins a war, a country can only rely on itself. Despite initial setbacks, Israel had a strong will to fight and reservists who were promptly deployed to stop its enemies’ advances.
Fortified by an urgent supply of weapons from the US, Israel emerged victorious.
A poll conducted early last month by CommonWealth Magazine found that 63.7 percent of respondents said they were not worried that there would be a war between Taiwan and China in the coming year, while 57.9 percent did not think that China would try to unite with Taiwan by force.
Nearly 60 percent thought that the US would send its armed forces to save Taiwan, and 54 percent thought that the US military could effectively protect Taiwan.
Nearly 60 percent of young people aged 20 to 29 did not reject bringing back military conscription, while 70 percent of all respondents were in favor of it.
Evidently, although people in Taiwan are optimistic about the US coming to their aid in a time of war, they, like the Israelis, are aware of the principle of helping oneself before expecting help from others as they feel uncertain about the future.
At a time when a consensus about bringing back military conscription is gradually forming, Taiwan should initiate the preparations and measures necessary as soon as possible.
To do so would demonstrate the nation’s determination to defend itself, just as a report this month describing navy marines training at the Zuoying Naval Base in Kaohsiung showed the world Taiwan’s willingness to fight.
Sung Chi-cheng is an assistant professor at Shih Hsin University’s Center for General Education and a former colonel instructor at National Defense University’s War College.
Translated by Julian Clegg
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS