When former Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe in 2021 said that a contingency in Taiwan would also be an emergency for Japan, it was taken as a warning that Tokyo would have to get involved if conflict erupted in the Taiwan Strait — if not to defend its national security, then certainly to address a transformed security environment if the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) were to annex Taiwan.
What seemed to be an insightful comment then is now — less than three years later — generally regarded to be the case. This is just one measure of how much the regional dynamic has changed. The CCP and its fellow travelers put the blame squarely on the US and its foreign policy, while others say it is the CCP’s behavior that has changed the landscape.
This is not a chicken-and-egg scenario. It is not difficult to see which party is responsible for increasing regional tensions.
These tensions were behind Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s decision to extend changes in Tokyo’s national security posture that started with Abe’s constitutional reinterpretation to allow the exercise of the right of collective self-defense.
Following Abe’s assassination in 2022, Kishida introduced further changes to enhance Japan’s defense, including significantly increasing defense spending, lifting the ban on exports of lethal defense equipment to third countries and, more recently, introducing changes that would augment the interoperability of US and Japanese forces.
Japan is not doing this to attack other countries: It is to protect itself from the CCP’s ambition.
As if to confirm Tokyo’s concerns, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force on Monday sent a Y-9 reconnaissance plane into Japanese airspace near the Danjo Islands in the East China Sea. Japanese Minister of Defense Minoru Kihara called it a “grave violation of Japan’s sovereignty.”
Clearly, the PLA is expanding its aggressive, destabilizing posture in the region, and talk about tensions in the Taiwan Strait has become less meaningful as the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea merge into one extensive and continuous region in which the CCP is asserting itself.
Some believe this is simply a historical inevitability, as a resurgent regional hegemon reclaims dominance after a “century of humiliation.” Former Singaporean permanent representative to the UN Kishore Mahbubani believes that the West and countries in the region should just allow China to resume its former hegemonic position, and that Taiwan must bow to the whims of destiny.
Former Singaporean minister for foreign affairs George Yeo (楊榮文) is of the same opinion, saying that China and Taiwan forming “one China” is the only sure way to peace. He should make clear that he understands the CCP will not allow Taiwan to have any real say in what form that “one China” would take.
In May, former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad argued that China should just be allowed to make its claims unchallenged in the interests of regional peace.
Is this how Taipei should play it? Should Tokyo just throw up its hands and allow the CCP to have its way? Should Manila stop pushing its maritime rights in the West Philippine Sea like a latter-day, Asian King Canute commanding the tide to retreat?
The answer is no. Kishida will be standing down as Japanese prime minister and as leader of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party next month. Taipei should work to maintain close ties with his successor and further security cooperation.
On Wednesday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that Taiwan might collaborate with Manila against China’s aggressive actions in the South China Sea. This would be a welcome development.
The right way is to stand up, not lie down and be walked over.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS