Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr and Vietnamese President Vo Van Thuong on Tuesday met in Hanoi to sign two memorandums of understanding on security cooperation in the South China Sea, establishing a comprehensive partnership between their countries’ coast guards.
The two countries are among claimants to disputed islands, reefs, banks and other features in the region, and both have had run-ins with the Chinese Coast Guard.
“We are firm in defending our sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction against any provocations,” Marcos said before the meeting. “At the same time, we are also seeking to address these issues with China through peaceful dialogue and consultations as two equal sovereign states.”
China claims most of the South China Sea, and it has attempted to exercise control over an area that overlaps the exclusive economic zones of Taiwan, Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam. To assert its claims, Beijing has increasingly harassed the navies of the Philippines, Vietnam, the US, Australia and other countries in the international waters.
It is exceedingly important for all countries with interests in the region to cooperate and combat Chinese aggression.
It is promising to see Vietnam and the Philippines cooperating despite their competing claims, and they should work with other countries in the region as well. In an opinion piece published by Foreign Policy on Sept. 6 last year, former US National Security Council senior director for Asian affairs Michael Green said that an “Asian NATO” could eventually emerge.
US allies in Asia “could very well move in the direction of collective security ... if concerns about deterring and stopping a destructive and dangerous regional war surpass concerns about trade, regional cohesion, or retaining strategic autonomy,” he wrote.
Beijing’s coercive behavior against its neighbors could encourage such an alliance “even without any overt Chinese use of force,” he wrote.
Taipei would be an important strategic partner in a regional security pact given its proximity to China, the importance of the Bashi Channel and the Taiwan Strait to shipping and naval strategy, and Taiwan’s experience in countering Chinese aggression.
Ideally, Taiwan would upgrade its maritime ports to accommodate larger vessels, allow regional partners to access its territory and engage in joint military training with neighbors. The US holds regular joint drills with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Indonesia, India and Australia. Taiwan should be invited to those drills, and there should be efforts to hold drills on a larger scale to incorporate more countries into simultaneous exercises.
In the South China Sea in particular, countries that agree to cooperate could share access to the islands, reefs and features they control, allowing each other’s vessels and aircraft to dock and land. This would be helpful in improving the efficacy of coast guard operations and helping secure the safe passage of commercial vessels.
Asia-Pacific countries have shied away from taking actions that could be interpreted as antagonistic toward China. However, if there were a coordinated response, China would be powerless to use economic coercion against those cooperating, without risking its own economic interests. China’s biggest export partners last year were the US (US$43.8 billion), Japan (US$13.3 billion) and South Korea (US$12.5 billion), while its biggest import partners were Taiwan (US$18.4 billion), South Korea (US$15 billion) and Japan (US$14.1 billion).
China might voice threats, but it is time that regional partners show Beijing that it has more to lose than gain through antagonism, and Taiwan can play a key role in containing its aggression.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS