Taiwan May Become a Pawn in US-China Competition

Published in UDN
(Taiwan) on 4 July 2021
by Yang-Ming Sun (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Pinyu Hwang. Edited by Patricia Simoni.
In the Group of Seven post-summit statement the other day, a chapter on stability across the Taiwan Strait was included for the first time in history. Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party government was ecstatic, and the intention of the United States to join hands with its allies on the eve of the centennial of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party was obvious. As a matter of fact, in his July 1 speech, Chinese Communist Party President Xi Jinping mentioned the Taiwan issue, saying critically that foreign forces would "end up badly battered" if they tried to bully China. The new-Cold-War situation between the United States and China is taking shape, and Taiwan will become a pawn between the two powers.

Since the end of the Cold War, the so-called Taiwan issue between the U.S., China and Taiwan has generally shifted along with the relationship between the U.S. and the Chinese Communist Party. This time, under the strong operation of the Joe Biden administration, the Taiwan Strait has suddenly been elevated to a structural issue. Under such circumstances, tensions across the Taiwan Strait are inevitable. In the medium to long term, the situation in the Taiwan Strait is expected to deteriorate. Of course, then, will the economic development of Taiwan not be greatly affected?

Does Taiwan really wish to become a part of this structural tension? Has the DPP administration considered the cost of doing so? Once we enter into the structural tenseness of the front lines, Taiwan's autonomy will decrease even further; unless there is a major conflict and a significant price to pay, there will be no turning back.

The Biden administration is trying to avoid criticism from Congress (especially the Republican Party) that it is "soft on China" and, at the same time, wants to show support for Taiwan against the Chinese Communist Party. But such support is a mistake.

In the medium to long term, the Biden administration's move is a major detriment to peace and stability in the region. It will most certainly affect the two pillars of U.S. stability in the Taiwan Strait: strategic reassurance and deterrence.

First, a deterrent must be reasonable in order to have its intended effect; once you go beyond the scope of reasonable conditions, the deterrent no longer has any meaning. Since the DPP came to power, it has been walking a path of separation, and has been challenging the bottom line of the Chinese Communist Party. Under such circumstances, any international organization or country that continues to demand stability in the Taiwan Strait by means of deterrence will certainly be perceived by Beijing as spawning and supporting Taiwan's independence. The question of whether or not the Chinese Communist Party will use force will no longer be the simple question of whether or not the cost of doing so is reasonable.

Secondly, the U.S. strategic reassurance in the Taiwan Strait has always been based on the one-China policy of not supporting Taiwan independence, not supporting "two Chinas," and not supporting "one China, one Taiwan." However, Biden has gone out of his way to raise the issue of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait in the G-7 communiqué, and doing so is obviously a tacit drift toward the "one China, one Taiwan" stance. What we should now be concerned about is whether Beijing will take strong action.

In truth, before and after Xi's July 1 speech on cross-strait issues, the U.S. had already given some thoughts to the issue, one of which was to reestablish the balance of strategic reassurance and deterrence with the Chinese Communist Party. Perhaps the recent talk of the Group of 20 summit in October involving a meeting between Biden and Xi will be more or less related to this matter.


日前G7峰會後宣言中,史無前例列了台海穩定一章,民進黨政府對此固欣喜若狂,美國聯手盟國在中共建黨百年前夕意圖明顯;果然,中共國家主席習近平七一講話,除提及台灣議題,批評外來勢力妄想欺負中國將「頭破血流」,美中新冷戰形勢儼然成形,台灣真要成為兩強權下的棋子。

冷戰結束以降,美中台間所謂台灣議題,大致只是在美國與中共關係間移動;這回在拜登政府強力運作下,台海驟然拉高成結構層次議題;在這情況下,台海緊張勢不可免;就中長期言,台海局勢必趨惡化是可預期的。當然,台灣經濟發展必將大受影響?

台灣真希望進入這結構性緊張議題中嗎?民進黨政府有沒有思考過,這可能要付出多少代價?一旦進入這結構性緊張的前緣安排,台灣自主性地位將更低,且除非出現重大衝突,付出重大代價,根本無法回頭。

拜登政府作法,不外是避免來自國會(尤其是共和黨)對其「對中國軟弱」的批評,同時也希望表現出支持台灣對抗中共。但這種支持卻是一種錯誤。

因為就中長期言,拜登政府此舉反而是對本區域和平穩定的重大傷害。因為這勢必影響美國在台海穩定的兩大支柱:「戰略再保證」與「嚇阻」。

首先,嚇阻必需在合理條件下,才具嚇阻效果;一旦超出合理條件範圍,嚇阻將不再有任何意義。民進黨執政以來往分離路上走,不斷挑戰中共底線;在這情況下,任何國際組織與國家再以嚇阻方式要求台海穩定,必然會被北京視為卵翼、支持台獨;中共是否動武將不再只是合理代價與否問題。

其次,美國在台海「戰略再保證」,始終是以不支持台獨、不支持兩個中國、不支持一中一台的一中政策為主;但拜登不惜把台海和平穩定,拉高到G7公報層次,顯已默示性漂流向一中一台情況,接下來大家要關心的,是北京是否會有強力動作?

其實,習近平七一講話就兩岸議題表態前後,美方已有若干思考,其中一個審視方向認為,應重建與中共「戰略再保證」及「嚇阻」的平衡。也許最近傳出十月G20峰會有關拜習會的說法,多少會涉及此事。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Germany: Cynicism, Incompetence and Megalomania

Austria: Musk, the Man of Scorched Earth

Venezuela: Vietnam: An Outlet for China

Israel: Trump’s National Security Adviser Forgot To Leave Personal Agenda at Home and Fell

Topics

Mexico: EU: Concern for the Press

Austria: Musk, the Man of Scorched Earth

Germany: Cynicism, Incompetence and Megalomania

Switzerland: Donald Trump: 100 Days Already, but How Many Years?

     

Austria: Donald Trump Revives the Liberals in Canada

Germany: Absolute Arbitrariness

Israel: Trump’s National Security Adviser Forgot To Leave Personal Agenda at Home and Fell

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Related Articles

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Venezuela: Vietnam: An Outlet for China

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Hong Kong: Can US Tariffs Targeting Hong Kong’s ‘Very Survival’ Really Choke the Life out of It?