Arming Taiwan or Friendship with China?
‘Among the many challenges facing the United States in an election year is the issue of arms sales to Taiwan. Before he leaves office, President Bush must decide whether or not to approve various major sales to the island, including 60 additional F-16s, Patriot PAC III missiles and Apache and Blackhawk helicopters. At present, the Department of State and the National Security Council are holding up these sales. This is an issue which deserves President Bush’s immediate attention,’ Ed Ross writes for the Wall Street Journal.
This is a complicated subject because of the difficult relationship China and Taiwan have with each other. China considers Taiwan to be a renegade province of the Chinese nation. It is ruled by those who formerly ruled China, but who were forced out of power and then forced to flee by Mao and his millions of forces (in the Chinese civil war, which resulted in the communists taking over).
The US has historically supported the Chinese government in Taiwan, or the government of Taiwan as we consider it nowadays. The main reason for this support was that the Americans needed an ally in that part of the region against the communists. It was all part of the global containment and later rollback strategy the US used against its communist enemies during the Cold War.
But the Cold War has ended. China is quickly changing. It is becoming increasingly capitalist, albeit not necessarily free. Chinese businesses invest millions even billions of dollars in the United States, and American businesses invest billions of dollars in China. In the coming years this trade will only increase. Ever since Richard Nixon visited China the two have become closer with each other; the Chinese understand that their system cannot survive without at least some free trade and capitalism, and the West understands that China has a gigantic market, which would result in Western businesses earning increasingly more money.
The situation has changed, and so - many may argue - should US policy towards China. And if US policy towards China changes, the policy towards Taiwan should do so as well. Selling arms to Taiwan will obviously not be good for the US-Chinese relationship. On the other hand, not selling weapons to Taiwan may very well result in the weakening of Taiwan (which could in the end result in a Chinese takeover). It’s a difficult situation, in which the US has to walk a very fine line.
Unfortunately, ths type of simplistic reporting obscures the real problems.
What is almost never mentioned is China’s aggressive and fallacious claims on many territories belonging to other countries.
It is never stressed that if China takes over Taiwan, it will be essentially a highly corrupt communist autocracy taking over a healthy and functioning democracy–one of the very few in Asia.
And rarely is it ever mentioned that a significant portion of Taiwan’s population want independence, and do not want to be tied politically or historically the river of blood and misery that makes up Chinese history.
Michael de Graffe July 20, 2008 @ 12:33 pm CEST
Unfortunately, ths type of simplistic reporting obscures the real problems. …
*****************************************************
You can’t expect the author to mention every detail about this issue. What you are really concerned is that he didn’t mention what you want him to.
I think the author did a good job. He outlined the main reason that caused the Taiwan issue. It is enlightening. If we just judging by trivial details or ideology reasons, we fail to see the forest for the trees.
> If we just judging by trivial details or ideology reasons, we fail to see the forest for the trees.
Ben - while I do agree with you that no author can mention every detail, I would hardly call "a highly corrupt communist autocracy taking over a healthy and functioning democracy" a ‘trivial detail.’
I have a lot of trouble with the below passage which is present in the article.
"The situation has changed, and so - many may argue - should US policy towards China. And if US policy towards China changes, the policy towards Taiwan should do so as well. Selling arms to Taiwan will obviously not be good for the US-Chinese relationship."
As caving into China every time it whines will portray America as lacking any strength of conviction in its foreign policy. In caving in to China’s demands what has America or more precisely the U.S. State department gained in return from the C.C.P.? Nothing. So the U.S. strips a democracy of its ability to defend itself, the C.C.P. gets to play the ultra nationalist card to bolster its domestic popularity and the U.S. is left looking weak and submissive. The C.C.P is still upgrading its capability to invade Taiwan and thanks to the submissive stance of the Bush Administration and the U.S. State Department the Taiwanese military is losing the ability to function even on a basic level. The F-16s are needed to replace fifties vintage F-5s while the Blackhawks are needed to replace Vietnam Era Hueys both the F-5s and the Hueys are well and truely at the end of their service life.
Given the current trajectory of the Bush Administration submissive attitude to the C.C.P soon there will be nothing to stop the annexation of Taiwan and the C.C.P will grow increasingly emboldened. Then the C.C.P will move on to ceasing the entire South China sea and the bullying of a democratic Japan.
There is a fair amount of "trivial details’ that are not sufficiently discussed in the above article.
Yes, the Taiwan issue is a maddeningly complicated issue, but certain things merit mention.
First, while this article doesn’t make the standard "Taiwan and China split in 1949" gaffe that nearly every article in the international press rehashes, it does fail to note — in discussing that China claims that Taiwan is a "renegade province" — that the flag of the PRC has never flown over Taiwan. Moreover, the only "Chinese dynasty to even claim control over Taiwan (they didn’t really care to much about it) was the Manchu Qing dynasty.
The Cold War dynamic, as you mention, is no longer, but China desperately needs to reinforce that image abroad, because, essentially, its the only argument it has in its assertion that Taiwan is a part of China. The government in Taiwan no longer claims to be the sole representative of all of China (including Mongolia and Tibet) — but the consitution has not been changed to acknowledge said policy change. Unofficially, Taiwan stakes no claim on "the mainland," but if that were to become official policy, China would loose its main argument for annexing Taiwan.
The most important issue not mentioned was well summed up by Andrew, so I’m not going belabor the point. What I will do is emphasize that doing business with China should not obviate striving to maintain the ideals we believe in. China has just as much to gain from doing business with the US as the US does with China, so there is no reason for the US to cave to China on every issue of principle.
This, of course, has a lot to do with 9-11, in my opinion, since the US has been pouring cold water in a boiling pot for about six years now without bothering to put out the fire.
To be clear, I have a hard time getting worked up about quitting arms sales to anyone. I wish we’d learn that they often get pointed back towards us. Yet, the idea that we should sell them to Taiwan (or support Taiwan’s democracy, or support the Taiwanese people’s right to decide for themselves what country they are a part of, or fight for Taiwan’s participation in the WHO and the UN, etc.) simply because it might anger China, is a bit much.
Taiwan is one of few democracies in Asia and it is among the freest countries in the world. China shouldn’t have the right to bully them to be anything but.
Robert
The Only Redhead in Taiwan
China is no friend of the US.
They are an economical opportunity, that is all.