The Japanese-language daily Nikkei published a two-part column describing Japan and democratic countries in Europe as “tacitly accepting” Israel’s and the US’ use of military force against Iran, profoundly reflecting on the two countries’ attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities and the reactions of Western nations.
European countries — which have consistently emphasized international law and multilateralism, but now choose to keep a low profile and silent by not condemning the attacks — are apparently not determined enough to uphold the principle of resolving conflicts peacefully.
Japan, which relies on the Middle East for its energy needs and is constrained by its security alliance with the US, finds itself in an uncomfortable position. The East Asian nation is not only ambiguous in its diplomatic policies, but is also demonstrating a lack of strategy.
The US, as a leader of the democratic bloc, did not just tacitly approve Israel’s military actions, but also directly took part in the conflict.
Since US President Donald Trump’s first administration withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal, also known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, in 2018, the US has adopted a tough stance on Tehran. Watching the US strike Iran soon after Trump’s return to the White House, belligerent China probably has mixed feelings.
The US is no longer playing the role of an arbitrator of the international order, but is instead overtly demonstrating its power.
As “might makes right” increasingly becomes a policy, the international order of the free world is undergoing a significant reshuffle.
The authoritarian bloc is stirring. Russia is bolstering its military cooperation with Iran, while China is promoting a “de-dollarization” and “de-Westernization” strategy centered around Iran, attempting to rewrite international rules.
From Ukraine to the Persian Gulf, and from the South China Sea to the Taiwan Strait, the world is entering a multifront confrontation. It is not just a military race, but a struggle between different systems and values.
Taiwan finds itself at the forefront of the confrontation between democracy and authoritarianism.
Taiwan is a global hub for strategy, democratic values and technology. Strategically located at a critical point in the first island chain, the nation controls the supply of the world’s most advanced semiconductors.
Taiwan is not only irreplaceable in the geopolitical landscape and the global tech industry, but it is also unique in the way that it is the only free and democratic political entity in the Chinese-speaking world. These achievements serve as Taiwan’s shield, a thorn in dictators’ side and a jewel cherished by the free world.
As the conflict in Ukraine drags on and the Middle East plunges into chaos, Europe observes in silence, while Japan is caught in a dilemma. Taiwan’s role has become increasingly clear.
Taiwan is not on the periphery, but the front line, no longer being a “troublemaker,” but a pillar safeguarding the values of freedom and democracy.
Even if the rules of the free world change, as long as Taiwan’s values remain steadfast, the world will see Taiwan not as a synonym of crisis, but as a beacon of freedom and democracy. The country is not a pawn to be manipulated, but a ray of hope for the world.
Wang Hui-sheng is chief director of the Kisei Ladies’ and Children’s Hospital in Japan, and a founding member of the East Asian Research Institute.
Translated by Fion Khan
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS