Following the passage of the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act by the US House and Senate with the support of the Democratic and Republican parties, US President Joe Biden on Friday last week signed the act into law.
Among many other things, the act authorizes the provision of a US$2 billion loan to Taiwan every year for five years from next year to 2027 through the US Department of State’s Foreign Military Financing, thus implementing the resolution embodied in the Taiwan Policy Act of 2022 to defend Taiwan’s security and support its self-determination.
Some critics keen to find fault have said that the US$2 billion is being offered as a loan when it was originally going to be aid that would not need to be repaid.
However, the reality is that Taiwan’s economic strength and financial stability are such that it does not need financial aid. US$2 billion is equivalent to NT$61.5 billion, which is only 3 percent of Taiwan’s total annual budget of NT$2 trillion (US$65.1 billion), so it does not make much difference.
The US’ provision of this loan is an expression of its strong support for Taiwan and its determination to jointly resist the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Through the US Congress’ bicameral and bipartisan support for using the national defense budget to resist the CCP and support Taiwan, the US is also showing its Japanese, Indian and Australian allies where it stands, encouraging them to make greater efforts to contain China.
Japan has already responded by greatly increasing its national defense budget. From next year to 2027, its five-year defense budget would reach a record-high of more than ￥40 trillion (US$303 billion). Meanwhile, Australia has also announced that it would increase its defense budget.
The move is also a part of the US’ policy of strategic clarity. In the past, the US maintained a policy of strategic ambiguity with respect to the Taiwan Strait. During then-US president Donald Trump’s tenure, the US realized that strategic ambiguity gave China too much leeway, allowing it to “rise as a great power.”
The ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine shows that an appeasement would only make war more likely, so the US’ Democratic and Republican parties have realized that to prevent war, the US must clearly and firmly warn the CCP not to overstep the line.
Specifying the US$2 billion sum is a clear statement by the US that its deterrence against the CCP is not an empty threat, but a commitment by the US to help Taiwan achieve robust military preparedness. The more Taiwan’s military preparedness is upgraded and strengthened, the lower the chance that China would resort to force. The most effective means of preventing war is always by increasing one’s military readiness.
The US’ move is also meant as a warning to CCP-friendly elements in Taiwan that the wind has changed. In the past, the US used strategic ambiguity to dupe China, so it tolerated CCP-friendly people in Taiwan flirting with China.
Former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) pursuit of strategic clarity made him a “troublemaker” in the eyes of the US.
However, the US has shifted to a policy of strategic clarity and no longer wants anyone in Taiwan to be friendly with the CCP. Whoever fails to grasp this change in US strategy and continues to push for relations with the CCP would become a thorn in the side of the US.
In financial terms, Taiwan can afford to repay the loan.
However, Israel receives a lot of money that does not need to be repaid. The biggest difference between Taiwan and Israel lies in their real strength. Israel’s role controlling the Middle East, and its achievements in military technology are things that Taiwan cannot match, which is why it does not receive such generous treatment as Israel.
Taiwan should reflect upon this difference and draw appropriate conclusions. Israel has a population of only 9 million people and excels in software innovation, whereas Taiwan is a major manufacturing base for semiconductors and hardware. Why does Taiwan lag so far behind in terms of military might? It is only a matter of determination.
Tommy Lin is a physician and president of the Formosa Republican Association and the Taiwan United Nations Alliance.
Translated by Julian Clegg
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other
As technological change sweeps across the world, the focus of education has undergone an inevitable shift toward artificial intelligence (AI) and digital learning. However, the HundrED Global Collection 2026 report has a message that Taiwanese society and education policymakers would do well to reflect on. In the age of AI, the scarcest resource in education is not advanced computing power, but people; and the most urgent global educational crisis is not technological backwardness, but teacher well-being and retention. Covering 52 countries, the report from HundrED, a Finnish nonprofit that reviews and compiles innovative solutions in education from around the world, highlights a
RSS