The administration of US President Donald Trump is bringing significant unpredictability and raising questions about its credibility among its allies, not just in Europe, but also in Asia.
In Europe, NATO countries are rushing to rearm, driven by Russia’s war in Ukraine and fears that they can no longer be sure of US protection. In Asia, most of the US’ allies have taken a wait-and-see approach, coupled with quiet diplomacy, as evidenced by the approach of South Korea, Japan and the Philippines.
Taiwan’s approach has been similar to Europe’s, including ramping up defense spending. In addition, it has been working to re-engineer its bilateral trading relationship with the US onto firmer footing to serve the long-term interests and stable relations of the two countries. That robust approach has demonstrated strong leadership from President William Lai (賴清德) and his administration at a time of significant challenges.
US officials and think tanks have for many years called for Taiwan and Europe to boost their defense spending as a percentage of GDP. That request did not emerge out of a vacuum. China’s rise — growing from a US$390.5 billion economy and spending US$6 billion on defense in 1990 to a US$18.77 trillion economy spending about US$231 billion on defense last year — has significantly changed the strategic landscape in East Asia. While China’s defense spending was about double Taiwan’s (US$11.4 billion versus US$5 billion) in 2000 — a manageable gap given Taiwan’s US backing — its defense budget last year was 12 times the size of Taiwan’s US$19.1 billion, which is less manageable, given the US’ strategic distraction, and decades of neglect in Taiwan’s military reforms and investments.
That has created an unbalanced situation in East Asia and is why the US has been calling for Taiwan to transition to an asymmetric defense strategy, as its historical symmetric, force-on-force approach is neither sustainable nor effective given the resource disparity. Washington also wants Europe to take up more of the defense burden to free up US resources, so it could play a bigger role in Asia to balance against China. That is not unreasonable.
As Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said last week about Europe relying too much on the US: “500 million Europeans are asking 300 million Americans to defend them against 140 million Russians... Europe today lacks the belief that we are truly a global force.”
Trump’s unpredictability and the US’ actions on Ukraine bring understandable worries for its democratic allies, and might cause some in Taiwan to question the US’ commitments to the nation as well. However, viewed from another angle, Trump’s policy is finally bringing the structural adjustment needed to engage in long-term strategic competition with China, restore a favorable balance of power in Asia and push back against Beijing’s revisionism. If correctly executed, that could be a positive development for the US and its allies on both continents.
However, regardless of the US’ actions, Taiwanese must get familiar with the mindset that they should take primary responsibility for their nation’s defense, with US help a welcome addendum.
As Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) said: “Taiwan must stop asking whether US troops would come to protect us.”
“Protecting our nation is our responsibility,” he said.
Lin’s comments are exactly right.
The dominant mode of this new era of geopolitics is self-reliance in defense, highlighted by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen launching the “Rearm Europe” plan on Tuesday. Rather than shirking from that reality, the Lai administration has shown leadership at a challenging time, which should be supported across the political spectrum.
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS