The US’ Taiwan policy act on Sept. 14 was approved by the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee by a vote of 17 to 5. The administration of US President Joe Biden has kept a close eye on its progress before it enters the US Congress for a vote.
The act was approved with slight modifications, reflecting a compromise between the US legislative and executive branches, and the final version released by the committee likely adheres to the stance of the Biden administration, as well as Democratic and Republican Party positions.
The smooth completion of its lawmaking process is just a matter of time.
When the act was made public, pro-unification voices in Taiwan came out to smear and slander it. Some tried to deceive fellow Taiwanese with intentional mistranslations, some misinterpreted the US’ intention to defend Taiwan, while others tried to imply that the act reflects only the will of the US Senate rather than the US government.
However, as deceptive as these fallacies might be, they cannot change an established US strategy that has long been determined.
If passed, the act would require the US Department of Defense to submit an annual Taiwan defense report on the premise of a “denial strategy.”
There is a fundamental difference between “denial” and “deterrence.” The US’ strategy to prevent China from attacking Taiwan has shifted from deterrence to denial, and the Taiwan policy act would only formalize what is already an implicit strategy.
Deterrence is to use strength and power to prevent an adversary from taking a desired action. Under a denial strategy, the US would continue to assist Taiwan in improving its self-defense capabilities.
The act says that the US would provide military assistance at no cost to help Taiwan develop asymmetric combat capabilities and enhance Taiwan’s international status.
The intention is to make it increasingly difficult for China to threaten Taiwan so that it will cease trying. This is also the reason Biden has said four times that the US would defend Taiwan if attacked.
During his visit to Japan in May, Biden said that he would be willing to use force to defend Taiwan, which many interpreted as a gaffe.
However, as he has continued to state the same point, it is obvious that what he said in Japan was no slip of the tongue. Biden intends to make the denial strategy clear.
The latest example came during an interview on the 60 Minutes television program aired on Sept. 15.
When asked if US forces would defend Taiwan against an attack, Biden firmly replied: “Yes.”
The US has learned from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine that making it clear that aggression is not tolerated is the best way to avoid war and maintain peace. Facing China’s intention to attack Taiwan, the US has come to realize that the vague strategy of the past could no longer work. It must clearly make China understand that if it makes reckless moves against Taiwan, the US would send troops to defend it.
Taiwan should certainly be self-reliant as well. With the help of the US military, Taiwan should more actively strengthen its combat capabilities and strive to improve its international status.
Some Taiwanese interpreted Biden’s remarks on 60 Minutes as not supporting Taiwanese independence.
“Taiwan makes their own judgements about their independence,” Biden said.
Based on the principle of national self-determination, Taiwan’s independence requires Taiwanese to express their will, which is not for the US to do.
“That’s their decision,” Biden said, showing respect for Taiwanese.
Now, Taiwanese should consider that it is time to show the will to assert self-determination.
Tommy Lin is director of Wu Fu Eye Clinic and president of the Formosa Republican Association.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then