That Washington has not sent troops to Ukraine to directly intervene in the Russian invasion has led some Taiwanese to doubt whether the US would defend Taiwan were China to attack.
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has even said that the US would send weapons, but not troops, were a war to occur across the Taiwan Strait.
At a sensitive time like this, US President Joe Biden appointed former chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen to lead a delegation to Taiwan to express Washington’s support.
The US does not fire back in international wars instantly as it does in defense of its homeland, preferring to contain escalation of overseas conflict through diplomacy and policy maneuvers. It is unlikely to put boots on the ground until a war develops to an extent that such action is required.
Before entering World War II, the US merely passed the Lend-Lease Act in 1941 to help the Allies obtain military supplies and equipment, while weakening Axis members through embargoes.
After Iraq invaded Kuwait in the 1990 Gulf War, Washington first pushed the UN Security Council to pass resolutions 660 and 661, joined the League of Arab States in condemning Iraq and imposed economic sanctions on Baghdad.
It launched operation Desert Shield to station troops in Saudi Arabia to prevent Iraq from invading other allies.
After the UN passed Resolution 678, authorizing the use of force, the US launched operation Desert Storm with coalition forces in 1991.
Between Aug. 2, 1990 and Jan. 15, 1991, the US military operation had prioritized defending its allies. Similarly, in the first few weeks of the Russia-Ukraine war, the US’ main strategy has been to defend its NATO allies.
However, with the US Air Force’s Global Hawk drones gathering intelligence and US$350 million in military aid from Washington combined with weapons and supplies offered by other nations, as well as volunteers pouring in to fight for Ukraine, it is clear that a compound warfare approach incorporating concepts from the Lend-Lease Act is under way.
Moreover, the US military has trained Ukrainian special forces to operate US-supplied weapons such as Javelin and Stinger missiles.
The operational patterns indirectly reveal a new type of military cooperation called cooperative security location, a US term for outposts and facilities used for regional training. This means that the US does not need to participate in battles, nor does it need to deploy troops to provide military support.
Ukraine is not a NATO member, so the US military is unable to directly intervene.
However, the US Taiwan Relations Act and the US-Japan security treaty provide the legal basis for Washington, Tokyo and other allies to directly intervene were a cross-strait war to occur.
In addition, the US military has been training Taiwanese special forces for years, and has extended military cooperation from standing forces to reserve forces through the US Department of Defense’s State Partnership Program.
Were war to break out between Taiwan and China, Washington would be able to follow the model of late US lieutenant general Claire Chennault, who commanded the Flying Tigers, a group of US volunteer fighter pilots formed in 1941 to help oppose the Japanese invasion of China.
If war should break out and the US not send troops to Taiwan immediately, there is no reason for pessimism as long as Taiwanese remain united.
Ou Wei-chun is chief legal officer of a private company.
Translated Eddy Chang
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
RSS