Taiwan Republic 台灣国 and world history classrooms: 1996 v. 2022 Chinese communist missile crisis – President Tsai and evolving Taiwanese national identity. 中華民囯台灣七十三年。主權互不隸屬。反共保台。

Because Taiwan Republic only appears in the western press in relation to geostrategery, “Chinese communist tensions,” and computer microchips, most English language analyses of Taiwan have been filtered through American and Chinese imperialist lenses. One of the greatest peaceful democratic revolutions engineered by the democratically elected president of Taiwan Dr. Tsai (LSE, Ph.D.) is to move from Taiwan Republic’s founding father President Lee Teng-hui’s formulation “RoC [in] Taiwan 中華民囯在台灣” to “RoC [as] Taiwan 中華民囯台灣” – and to have this formulation accepted by the leading world powers of US, Japan, and NATO – and accepted as a solid governing majority in Taiwan.

The 1996 Chinese communist missile crisis occurred on the eve of Taiwan’s first democratic presidential election – President Lee led Taiwan from the era of China KMT foreign dictatorship to Taiwanese democracy. Dr. Lee had to balance between the new, fragile democratic era and his role as the inheritor of CCK’s China KMT dictatorial party-state while facing Chinese communist belligerence and muddle-headed US policy.

In contrast, the 2022 Chinese communist missile crisis – though the Chinese military is stronger – has occurred in a very different environment. Since 1996 Taiwan’s democracy has peacefully transferred power between political parties twice – DPP to China KMT; China KMT back to DPP. More significant: Dr. Tsai is the first democratically elected president wherein during her second term her level of support has remained above fifty percent.

The impressive global and domestic re-engineering President Tsai has accomplished is this. During her October 10, 2021 speech she demarcated the differences between the “status quo” by the China CCP and the China KMT – one China and Taiwan is subjugated by China; versus the Lee-Tsai formulation, where the status quo is defined as RoC Taiwan for the last 73 years, and the boundaries between PRC and RoC Taiwan are that neither entity has claims of sovereignty over the other. Even more important, Taiwan RoC, RoC Taiwan, or Taiwan Republic, the key notion offered by President Tsai is democratic sovereignty – only the 23 million citizens living in Taiwan have the right to democratically choose their own government and chart their own future.

This Tsai formulation, RoC Taiwan 73 years, is a modernized version of the Lee Special State to State. The big difference is, unlike Lee’s earlier attempt, the Tsai formulation was not rejected by the major world powers of the US, Japan, and NATO. President Tsai then followed through on this major October 10th policy speech with a speech at the CCK Museum where she politically separated the younger dictator Chiang from his father dictator Chiang Kai-shek – endorsing CCK’s principle of “Anti-communism, protecting Taiwan” as a part of the “RoC Taiwan 73 years democratic sovereignty.” Another important step is to solidify a stable domestic democratic majority. From the October 10, 2021 speech to the CCK Museum speech, President Tsai has balanced historical memory, democratic consolidation, and compromises in national identity, with great power geostrategery.

The most remarkable manifestation of this national identity re-engineering from President Tsai is her convincing pan-green supporters to embrace RoC Taiwan, the flag, and the national military. As a young college student in the American midwest, I remember reading “outside the dictatorship party” 黨外 anti-China KMT/pro-Taiwan independence magazines, and the Taiwan military is conflated as the China KMT military – the enforcers of the dictatorship. In the 1980s it was not uncommon for these writers to advocate against the US selling arms to Taiwan, because this was seen by them to be selling arms to the China KMT dictatorship. So to see, during the 2022 Chinese communist missile crisis, so many pan blue-red China KMT supporters attack the Taiwanese military, and the pan-green DPP supporters show the RoC flag and support the military – a seismic, foundational national revolution. Will have an impact on Taiwanese democracy, regional order, and the US Indo-Pacific geostrategery for decades to come. Missiles and jet fighters and submarines are paramount to Taiwan’s national security. A stable, peaceful, governing majority in Taiwanese national identity focusing on democracy is equally important to Taiwanese national security and stability in the Indo-Pacific. 16.8.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Taiwanese civilian perspective on ‘asymmetric warfare’ and Taiwan’s national defense strategy 台灣作戰策略中的不對稱防衛辯論 賴怡忠 思想坦克: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

美國這幾年針對不對稱有個說法,就是台灣為了戰力保存,應該在武獲過程朝向取得「小而多的東西,而非大而少的東西」(a large number of small things, not a small number of big things)。但如果回顧在2009年時任國防部助理部長的葛瑞森將軍提到台灣應走不對稱與創新時,他指出不對稱無法取代傳統軍武提供能力,但能夠降低中國對台越來越顯著的數量優勢,降低中國根據這個優勢而發展的行動效度。之後更有人提到不對稱的重點是將不對稱視為作戰/行動概念,而不是物質概念(武器的大小與多少)。從這角度看,美方對於「不對稱防衛」概念的理解也是莫衷一是,沒有清楚的操作型定義,更甭提軍事準則。如果是因應情境而不採取對稱對應的方式,顯示大家對於「什麼不是不對稱」比對於「什麼是不對稱」有較清楚的想法。那這可以表示以載台來否定其不是不對稱防衛,是否就失之武斷呢?在戰略層次上,專注於反登陸的不對稱防衛策略,根據美方部分前官員的誠懇建議,希望台灣不要將資源浪費在空防與海防上。但現在的建議是連不增加新品,就是幫既有系統換裝的作為,都不為對方所喜。當然美方也說,類似的問題也發生在美國的軍事改革上,對台灣的困境有「同情的理解」。只是台海防衛是台灣的生死大事,我要怎麼做當然是我的決定,因為是我在付代價,自然沒法對美方主張照單全收。這個無法對美方照單全收的立場,除了台海防衛是我自己的事外,也與美方對台灣防衛至今持續採「戰略模糊」有關。如果美國承諾可以在中國攻台時協助防衛台灣的空防與海防,台灣要專注在反登陸防衛自然沒什麼問題。但因為戰略模糊策略,軍方無法預判美國是否一定會來,自然其防衛策略就必須涵蓋每一個角落。雖然因此會影響整體的防衛力,但放棄某些區域防衛的結果,一定會導致中方極力攻擊這個弱點區域以擴大戰果。如果台美有類似冷戰期間美日同盟所謂的「美矛日盾、美攻日守」的角色與任務分工(roles and mission assignment),即便還不是具體的條約同盟,但肯定台灣對於以反登陸為主的不對稱防衛能更誠心接受。

This is an important summary of the debates over Taiwan’s national security strategy during the last few decades, and the role played by “asymmetric warfare.” On that term, or “porcupine strategy,” students of global affairs are wise to be cautious to separate the jargon-chasers/repeaters from the professionals with a realistic grasp of the trade-offs between different options. Dr. Lai’s essay is an additional important corrective – in a field dominated by American voices, where the civilian, non-China KMT party-state voices inside Taiwan are scarce, it is a good sign that Taiwan’s decades-long democracy is slowly penetrating the China KMT dictatorship-dominated national security arena. Dr. Lai’s paragraph on America’s strategic ambiguity and Taiwan’s inability to fully accept the American advice on asymmetric warfare is most important. To the extent that the US, Japan, and democratic allies can operationalize President Biden’s repeated expression of strategic clarity regarding Taiwan’s democratic sovereignty status quo, adopting a version of asymmetric warfare would become more likely in Taiwan.

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Taiwan Republic

A significant ‘no-position’ position: ‘No position’ on sovereignty: Ned Price, Taipei Times: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

US Department of State spokesman Ned Price on Monday said that Washington does not take a position on the sovereignty issue between Taiwan and China, a position not often explicitly stated by US officials. Price was responding to a question at a news briefing on whether Washington’s “one China” policy supported the belief that “Taiwan is part of China and that the US respects Chinese territorial integrity and sovereignty over Taiwan.” The US “does not take a position on sovereignty,” Price said, adding that Washington’s “one China” policy has not changed and has been at the crux of the US’ approach to Taiwan since 1979, when the US’ Taiwan Relations Act went into effect.

Several important global and historical contexts usually missing in the general discourse on the Chinese communist problem. First, this “no position” position by the US, clearly stated, takes place a year after President Tsai’s significant democratic sovereignty Taiwan has never been a part of the PRC speech. The US, Japan, and EU did not respond to that speech – they neither endorsed, nor disavowed, President Tsai’s assertion that Taiwan has never been a part of communist China, that China and Taiwan exercise separate sovereignties, and that the future of Taiwan belongs exclusively to the twenty-three million citizens of Taiwan exercising their democratic sovereignty.

Since that speech, the emphasis of the US, Japan, and EU has been on the peaceful ‘status quo’ – meaning, as they see more and more menacing signs of Chinese communist plans for military options to annex Taiwan, the international line for acceptable behavior has been underlined and sharpened.

Finally, a more subtle but critical point. The US may have no “formal” position on Taiwanese sovereignty (and significantly, Price phrased this as sovereignty across the strait, meaning, Chinese communist sovereignty is also up for discussion ….) but the ‘body language’ of the US, Japan, and EU since the 2021 speech by President Tsai has been anything but position-less. The Taiwanese de facto embassy in Washington, DC, and Tokyo and major European capitals have been as active and public as they have been in decades. European and Asian diplomats visit the Taiwanese embassy in DC and Tokyo – Taiwanese diplomats meet regularly with their American, Japanese, and European counterparts across the globe. One may call all of this “unofficial” and “no position” and “no change in policy” all one wishes – what is one to make of all of this? A peaceful status quo marks the Chinese communist military option as a catastrophic international incident. No position on sovereignty saves a little bit of face for the Chinese communists – incidentally, President Tsai convincing her supporters to tolerate, for now, “RoC” does the same – while the US, Japan, and the EU in behavior push interactions with Taiwan up to the edge of all-but-formal-recognition.

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Taiwan Republic

Is an insignia just an insignia? US Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) in Taiwan and the Taiwan Policy Act of 2022: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

The first photo is of the Taiwanese ambassador to the US opening the new building for the Taiwanese military mission to the United States. Second is the historic US Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) logo from the US-Taiwan Mutual Defense Treaty days. What do you see? MAAG represents decades of US military advisors and assistance in fixing a hapless China KMT military (along with Japanese military advisors ….). An era when the US interest in Taiwan not becoming a part of the PRC was official and required little doublespeak. It is impossible for the Taiwanese embassy or military attache to choose a logo without US feedback. If this is the case this would have been the most oddly inconsistent episode for a hypercautious President Tsai, and her even more hypercautious Ministry of National Defense.

So what does this mean? I don’t think it is a coincidence that the US, Japan, and even some in NATO have moved towards strategic clarity coupled with actual military muscles in and around Taiwan. I also think it is easy to see shadows – updated for a different reality in Taiwan and the US – of MAAG in the Taiwan Policy Act of 2022. The US-Taiwan-Japan strategic dilemma of 2022 is not hardware alone – Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense, its generals and admirals and officer corps, and its national intelligence apparatus, require guidance and rapid reforms.

Much as my observation before that the salami slicing process the US and the PRC went through from 1949 to 1979, the US, Japan, and other global democracies are doing with democratic Taiwan now – with the reality that PRC is militarily more powerful than the Chiang dictatorship back during 1949-1979 – with the ultimate objective of pushing US-Japan-NATO relations with Taiwan Republic up to everything but formal diplomatic recognition, with an international consensus that a Chinese communist military invasion to annex Taiwan would not be tolerated. The process began with Taiwan’s first president Dr. Lee decades ago, the special state-to-state formula, now given substance by President Tsai, Prime Minister Abe’s free and open Indo-Pacific, and President Biden’s strategic clarity. 29.9.2022

History of MAAG in Taiwan:

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Taiwan Republic

Taiwan to purchase NASAMS for Air Bases 美國同意軍售NASAMS防空系統 空軍重啟「天隼二號」力拚排入2024年預算 Up Media: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

據指出,今年6月20日在美國馬里蘭州安納波利斯(Annapolis)舉行的台美高層對話「蒙特瑞會談」(Monterey Talks)中,美方主動向我方說明,為強化我中低空防空系統的戰力,同意出售由挪威康斯堡防衛與航太公司(Kongsberg Defence and Aerospace)和美國雷神公司合作推出的「國家先進防空系統」(NASAMS)的第三型改良;因中科院陸射劍二防空系統提供陸軍做為野戰防空系統,目前生產線已飽額,而空軍急需提升東部佳山與台東基地,以及台北等機場的中低空防空系統的防衛能量,經政府高層同意後,空軍重啟「天隼二號」專案,並於8月底赴美進行訪商與現地勘察防空系統運作等各項作業,返台後已著手進行武器獲得建案需求文件的撰寫,在年底前提出整體獲得規劃書後,排入2024年的國防預算中。這次美方同意出售的NASAMS防空系統,也是美國現役部署在華盛頓特區周圍,用來保衛首都空域的利器。該系統最初是以結合MPQ-64「哨兵」雷達及AIM-120先進中程空對空飛彈(AMRAAM)為基礎開發的陸基版本,射程可達25公里,高度範圍可達 14-15公里。NASAMS系統第二和第三型改良版陸續加入了Link 16的軍事網路連線功能,並能選擇使用AIM-9X Block II型「響尾蛇」(Sidewinder)飛彈、德製IRIS-T短程防空飛彈,或是AMRAAM增程版(ER)等不同彈種。

If this report is accurate, that the US will sell more than four batteries of the NASAMS to Taiwan Republic for Taipei, Hualien, Taitung, and CCK Air bases, the system itself is fine. Two things to note. Taiwan’s domestic military production has a technological and a production bottleneck. I am worried about the Chinese communist’s ability to infiltrate critical information on Taiwan-developed weapons. What Taiwan’s domestic weapons development has lacked, and this is related to the unsteady and contradictory US policies, is the ability to focus on systems and platforms where Taiwan has the most technological advantage, and leave the other systems to imports. A cursory review of what Taiwan has tried to domestically develop over the last two decades shows a catalog of everything and anything – many items, advanced torpedoes, and next-generation jet fighters, probably do not make sense; while other items, drones, and unmanned vehicles, guided antitank missiles, long-range counterstrike missiles, could have used more focus and investments.

But then one could and should do the same thing with decades of contradictory American policy. Take a peek at the list of major weapons the US sold to Taiwan for the last few decades and it is difficult to create a coherent national security narrative out of them. The F-16A/B with Sparrow missiles instead of the F-16C/D because? Why the Kidd class destroyers and not AEGIS/VLS destroyers/frigates? Why did the US actively obstruct Taiwan’s attempts to acquire submarines for decades? The underlying mistaken premise – that Chinese communist military ambition can be managed by DC, that if the communists decide to invade and annex Taiwan it will be because Taipei and/or DC “provoked” such a decision, has infused America’s decisions on what weapon systems can be sold to Taiwan. This is where short-range systems like the NASAMS represent that continued mistaken notion from the US – “defensive,” “not provocative,” “short-range/point defense,” – while lacking a consistent strategic and tactical vision. Given limited defense resources in Taiwan, Japan, and the US, do the short-range NASAMS belong in the top ten missiles Taiwan Republic must purchase now? The answer to that depends on the level of strategic clarity and commitment the US provides to Taiwan and other democratic allies in this region. 28.9.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Taiwan Republic

USAF General: If China attacks Taiwan, US will strike Chinese communist logistics 中國若犯台 美空軍副參謀長:美國會打擊中國後勤補給 自由時報: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

美國空軍負責戰略整合的中將副參謀長希諾特(Clinton Hinote)6日警告,如果中國侵略台灣,美國會鎖定打擊中國的核心後勤補給,並讓犯台變成「史上最艱難軍事行動之一」。希諾特出席大西洋理事會(The Atlantic Council)一場未來空戰研討會時說:「我們將使得對我們的朋友(台灣)採取軍事攻擊行動,變得非常艱難,我希望我們的潛在對手中國,如果深思穿越90英里海峽並與台灣作戰的困難,會想到這一點。」他補充說,「我希望他們能明白,我們不會讓他們的後勤暢通。」希諾特強調,美方將竭盡所能阻止中國犯台,並讓犯台成為史上最艱難的軍事行動之一。他也以侵略台灣的威脅,說明美國戰略方針需專注於維持當前的「均勢」(balance of power),而不是推翻或擾亂其中心。

My impression, anecdotally, is that ever since former Prime Minister Abe sounded the alarm re: the possibility of the Chinese communists launching an invasion to annex Taiwan Republic (An emergency for Taiwan is an emergency for Japan, hence an emergency for America.) – not a month passes without a major civilian or military leader in the US and Japan making unusual comments about Chinese communist military adventurism, and signs of concrete preparation on the US, Japan, and democratic allied side. President Biden’s repeated strategic clarity regarding a Chinese communist military invasion to annex Taiwan, seen in this broader context, suggest that – like the US and UK before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Washington and Tokyo are seeing troubling intelligence regarding Beijing’s intentions. In decades of following this, I have, for example, never heard a senior US military leader speak so concretely of what will occur during a China-Taiwan-Japan-US war. For all of the theorizing and arguments over abstractions like the One China Policy and Strategic Ambiguity – or even what that magical ‘cross-strait’ status quo means – the lesson of Ukraine is that democracies must act earlier and firmer to prevent an invasion from a dictatorship – and that dictators care primarily about the survival of their dictatorship, above anything else. How to communicate clearly to Beijing that the use of force will end the Chinese communist dictatorship, that’s the only policy-making issue that matters. 27.9.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Taiwan Republic

Time to End Taiwan’s Isolation from the United Nations, by Bi-khim Hsiao, Taiwan’s Ambassador to the US, National Interest: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

Only the democratically elected government of Taiwan has the right to represent the 23.5 million Taiwanese people, and the time has come to give them a voice on the international stage.

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) brought its aggression against Taiwan to new heights last month, with serious consequences for the Indo-Pacific region. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) visit to Taiwan was met with unprecedented, large-scale joint military drills by the PRC. In a blatant attempt to unilaterally upend the status quo across the Taiwan Strait, China disrupted air and sea routes critical to the regional economy and fired missiles over our island and into nearby waters. This campaign of aggression must be understood as part of a struggle between democracy and authoritarianism—a struggle the United Nations (UN) cannot afford to sidestep. China’s military exercises were a clear violation of the UN charter, which states that international disputes are to be resolved through peaceful means. But perhaps even more damaging is their longtime legal war against Taiwan within the UN. Seeking to enforce its propaganda on international society, China has exerted undue influence behind the scenes, effectively barring Taiwan’s participation in the UN and its specialized agencies. For far too long, Taiwanese experts, journalists, and students have been denied access to UN gatherings, such as this month’s General Assembly in New York City. Even tourists with Taiwanese IDs have been unjustly prevented from visiting any UN premises around the world. While unfair to Taiwan, the consequences of our exclusion are even greater. Taiwan has a strong record of being a responsible stakeholder in the international community and a reliable partner on issues of global concern, including in such high-stakes areas as supply chain security, climate change, and the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic. Indeed, Taiwan prides itself on being a force for good in the world, and we have much to contribute. All we need is the opportunity. Unfortunately, from the World Health Organization’s fight to contain the Covid-19 pandemic to the International Civil Aviation Organization’s mission to ensure global aviation safety, Taiwan’s exclusion has also meant that the world is denied the opportunity to benefit from our expertise. This nefarious state of affairs was brought about by the PRC’s intentional conflation of UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 with their so-called “One China principle,” which falsely asserts that Taiwan is part of the PRC. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, Resolution 2758 doesn’t mention Taiwan even once. The 1971 document merely decided upon the question of who represents the UN member state “China,” without endorsing the PRC’s claims of sovereignty over Taiwan or who should represent Taiwan in the UN. The ironclad reality is that Taiwan has never been a part of the PRC. It is long past time that international institutions like the UN acknowledged this reality.

The Lee-Abe-Tsai-Biden bottom lines are: The magical ‘cross-strait status quo’ is that Taiwan has (praise the Buddha) never been a part of the ‘People’s’ Republic of China. Taiwan Republic’s future is based on the democratic sovereignty of its twenty-three million Taiwanese citizens. (Not Taiwan’s business, but the world ought to ask, on what basis do the Chinese communists claim legitimacy to oppress its one billion subjects?)(Or is asking such a commonsensical question going to require smelling salt for American academia and think tanks? ….) And a Chinese communist war of annexation against Taiwan is an international violation that will be met with a devastating military-economic-diplomatic war of resistance from the Free World.

Global studies-world history pro-tip: power, broadly defined, determines everything in world affairs. Whether communist China will annex democratic Taiwan will ultimately be determined by how much total power the US, its democratic allies, and Taiwan Republic are willing to bring to bear. Still, if you follow this stuff as obsessively as I do, notice this. From the President of the United States of America on down to every cabinet member to generals and admirals to Japan and other democratic allies, for the last two years, the free world is demarcating a political-diplomatic “boundary” from which the China CCP and the China KMT may not define a communist Chinese invasion of Taiwan as an “internal affair.” I hate what’s happened to occupied Tibet, occupied East Turkestan, Tiananmen, Hong Kong — former two are Chinese imperialism foreign invasions but the world dropped the ball; the latter two are sadly domestic affairs. An additional historical context. For decades the first voice to denounce a Taiwanese ambassador in DC writing such an article in public would be the US State Department — in a bipartisan fashion by the way. So to see coordinated efforts, US, Japan, EU, and the Taiwanese ambassador adding to this effort with US assent/coordination — The Lee-Abe-Tsai Indo Pacific coming into reality, with the democratic west about two decades late to the party — but, better late than never. All remarkable. Let’s hope all of this is in time to deter-prevent a foolish Chinese communist war of annexation. 26.9.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Taiwan Republic

USS Higgins Joins Canadian Warship to Transit Taiwan Strait USNI: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

“USS Higgins Joins Canadian Warship to Transit Taiwan Strait. USS Higgins (DDG-76) conducted a Taiwan Strait transit on Tuesday, the Navy announced. Higgins performed the transit in cooperation with Royal Canadian Navy Halifax-class frigate HMCS Vancouver (FFH-331), according to a Tuesday Navy news release. The strait transit was done outside of any territorial waters, Pentagon Press Secretary Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder said during a Tuesday press briefing. Higgins and Vancouver conducted a routine transit “in accordance with international law,” according to the Navy release. “Higgins’ and Vancouver’s transit through the Taiwan Strait demonstrates the commitment of the United States and our allies and partners to a free and open Indo-Pacific,” according to the release. “Cooperation like this represents the centerpiece of our approach to a secure and prosperous region.”

But seriously: how many times does the President of the United States of America have to say, in plain words, again and again that the Chinese communists are not allowed to militarily annex Taiwan before these words are not branded as “gaffes”?

American academia, think tanks, press, and officialdom and their incessant fuss-potting and The Twitters meltdowns notwithstanding, they were never “gaffes” — The President of the United States of America and leader of the greatest global naval empire in world history has spoken. AEGIS destroyer with Canadian frigate – accompanied by Taiwanese navy and coast guard? – as exclamation marks. Let’s hope the Japanese Navy will appear soon. My heartfelt congratulations to divisive and controversial ultranationalist dictator Xi Jinping for getting even the most dovish Canadians to sail their warships through the Taiwan Strait. Xi’s parents must be so proud, even Chairman Mao didn’t manage to unite the global democracies thusly. 23.9.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Taiwan Republic

Ticonderoga Cruisers for the Taiwanese Navy and Porcupine/asymmetrical warfare 台灣政策法五年軍援 專家:爭取神盾艦: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

國防院中共政軍與作戰概念研究所副研究員舒孝煌受訪表示,若以五年內國軍能籌獲且能形成戰力的軍備而言,空軍可以嘗試爭取增加精準打擊能力的彈藥,例如AGM-158C遠程反艦飛彈,以及具有對匿蹤目標偵蒐的紅外線搜索與追蹤(IRST)莢艙系統;陸軍則可爭取各式單兵個人裝備,如防彈衣、輔助瞄具等和遠程火砲,以及「機動短程防空」(M-SHORAD)系統。舒孝煌指出,我國海軍的濟陽級是最需被取代的主戰艦艇,美國海軍有多艘「提康德羅加」級巡洋艦即將退役,若能順勢爭取將能增進海軍的區域防空能力,也能讓海軍具備彈道飛彈的偵測能力以及反彈道飛彈能力,或可爭取美方的「濱海戰鬥艦」(LCS),用於中國軍艦對台的灰色地帶作戰,操作成本也較低,並能配國造雄風系列反艦飛彈,增進反艦能力。

How Taiwan Republic’s national defense became so precarious is a historical, multifaceted phenomenon designed for anyone with an ax to grind to select just one piece to focus on, and ignore all the others. As a historian-scholar, I am trained to discuss and debate forever – but Taiwan and its democratic allies do not have the luxury of doing this because I suspect dictator Xi Jinping is suffering from the same imperialist malady that infected dictator Putin. So whether you are attached to these think tank jargon – porcupine and Javelins – or not, the reality remains – Taiwan and its democratic allies need to bring as many missiles into the theater, as rapidly and affordably as possible. Sending to Taiwan recently retired US Ticonderoga cruisers makes sense.

For decades the game between the US and Taiwan – this is what “strategic ambiguity” really means – is that Taiwan obsessively focuses on one or two major weapon systems partly in a hope that this one system will “solve” its defense like a talisman, but also tea leaf reading for signs that America has finally decided to treat Taiwan as it treats Japan, Korea, Israel – as a democratic ally. So whether it was the F-16 in the 1980s, or Arleigh Burkes in the 1990s, or submarines in like forever, decade after decade, the two sides dance this dance of eternal disappointment.

Debating about porcupine/asymmetrical warfare makes zero sense without this historical-political-diplomatic context. I am not a military expert and will defer to the expertise of military leaders in Taiwan, Japan, and America – but their military analysis is not actionable without taking into account America’s history of ambivalence towards Taiwan. Which makes President Biden’s relative strategic clarity remarkable. Thousands of Javelins and Stingers work very differently with an actively militarily engaged US and Japan – and would be disastrous if Taiwan’s democratic allies fail to show up.

Which gets us to this report on Taiwan requesting the US Navy decommissioned Ticonderoga cruisers. One thing I have noticed about certain policy debating circles is that at some moment of a debate keywords turn into jargon, jargon turn into mantras, and mantras turn into angels on the head of a pin style debates – realists and unrealistic, porcupine or not – detached from the purpose of the debate. Whether Ticonderogas or not, the only thing that matters is that Taiwan Republic, the US, Japan, and democratic allies coordinate a strategic and tactical plan to deter and defeat a Chinese communist invasion to annex Taiwan. Stingers and Javelins and a territorial defense force may play a role. Ticonderogas may, too. The main imperative is to bring as many missiles into the theater for Taiwan and its allies as quickly and cheaply as possible. And perhaps the elderly Ticonderogas are no longer able to serve America’s global maritime empire but with affordable fixes can serve as an instant upgrade to Taiwan’s missile-air defense – basically AEGIS missile barges. It would help Taiwan break the AEGIS/VLS barriers cheaply and quickly. And if strategic clarity is the direction we are headed in, this would be a good opportunity for the Taiwanese, Japanese, and American navies to link their platforms-operations. All of this requires some creativity on the part of Taiwanese and US national security leaders not known for such flexibilities. 22.9.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

//////
“An emergency for Taiwan is an emergency for Japan, which is also an emergency for America” – The Lee-Abe-Tsai Indo-Pacific.

Geostrategery and World History classrooms

Five Chinese communist ballistic missiles meant to terrorize democratic citizens of Taiwan Republic landed in the Japanese EEZ, prompting protest and alarm from Japan. These Chinese communist missiles are evidence of Shinzo Abe’s foresight. Former Prime Minister Abe crystallized important ideas ahead of others when months ago he asserted, “An emergency for Taiwan is an emergency for Japan, which is also an emergency for America.”

We should sincerely thank the Chinese communists for doing everything they can to inadverdently 1. Encourage the Japanese to finally write their own constitution, normalize their nation as a regional power, and double the size of their military. 2. Give much military intelligence and data to the US-Taiwan-Japan military alliance. And 3. To ensure that Japanese and American military officers and military assets return to Taiwan Republic sooner than I had guessed. Don’t be surprised if Australian, Canadian, and British military presence, for the first time after the Pacific War, also appears in Taiwan Republic. I expect more high-level visits to Taiwan from global democracies. And the Quad+AUKUS+Japan+NATO will adjust the One China myth sooner rather than later. Just as dictator Putin has singlehanded done more for Ukrainian nationalism than many others, ultranationalist and controversial-divisive dictator Xi wins the Taiwan Independence-Formosan Nationalism Lifetime Achievement Award. 4.8.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Taiwan Republic

Annual Taiwan-US Military Dialogue -Monterey Talks and intelligence collaboration【台美蒙特瑞會談】軍情局長楊靜瑟首獲邀列席 CIA盼與台合作對中國情戰 Up Media: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic classrooms

據指出,楊靜瑟就任軍情局長後,其管理方式是尊重並傾聽各專業單位的意見,再彙整意見後才會提出其作法,在人事管理上也是尊重專業與績效來考量其升遷,在這一連串的「安內」作法後,軍情局內部躁動的氣氛逐漸平靜下來。不過,因近來中國對台軍事動作頻繁,加上美CIA高層釋出,中國國家主席習近平告知解放軍,要在2027年發展出武統台灣的能力,反觀軍情局在之前內耗太嚴重,一時間對於中國對台的情勢研析,無法提出有質量與前瞻性預判,時常就被部長邱國正數落責難,讓楊靜瑟的壓力不少。據了解,這次美國CIA提出直接與軍情局情報對接,希望能以直接合作模式,對中國的研判能更精準;不過,國防部最後考量其情報來源的保護,最後還是裁示軍情局可與美國CIA直接進行情報合作與交換,還是先由聯二次長室審核後才可予以交流。

If this report is accurate, that the US (CIA) invited Taiwanese Military Intelligence to collaborate directly with the CIA, then this is good news. The Taiwan Ministry of National Defense is the least democratized and most requiring of revolutionary changes in Taiwan’s national government, and the intelligence agencies are even more so. Anything that key democratic allies of Taiwan can do to help Taiwan’s national security apparatus democratize and modernize will do as much to deter a Chinese communist invasion as weapons and increased defense spending. This is also where strategic clarity on the part of the US will help greatly. 21.9.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Taiwan Republic

Strategic ambiguity is dead, long live strategic ambiguity: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

How many times does the President of the United States of America have to say the same thing before the DC press corps, American academia, think tankers, and officialdom stop branding it as a “gaffe”?

Washington DC chattering class and their parlor games notwithstanding, I assume this simple statement of fact surprises zero leaders in Beijing and Taipei. The flashy headlines are about committing American fighting women and men in defense of Taiwan – the strategic clarity of American policy has always been that the United States of America and its allies will not tolerate the changing of the “status quo” between communist China and democratic Taiwan by force. Nor will the US accept unilateral changes to the status quo by any party.

The worrisome aspect is not that President Biden has now stated this simple fact four times, or that the DC foreign policy luminaries do the hysteria meltdowns they always do on the Twitters. It is signs from Japan, the US, and other democratic allies that a Chinese communist invasion to annex Taiwan is no longer theoretical. Strategic ambiguity is being erased not because America is choosing it, but because Chinese communist clarity is forcing the issue. This is why President Tsai needed to demarcate the international borders between the PRC and ‘RoC’Taiwan and its democratic sovereignty on October 10, 2021. This is why former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe needed to declare that a crisis for Taiwan is a crisis for Japan, and hence a crisis for the United States. And this is why President Biden has had to declare America’s military defense of Taiwan four times.

As someone with many relatives in Taiwan, I’d say for most democratic citizens of Taiwan, though they may be grateful for any foreign assistance, the point is not for American soldiers to fight for Taiwan, but to have a comprehensive, global democratic effort to deter and prevent Beijing from starting a war – without Taiwan giving up its democratic sovereignty. Strategic ambiguity may have made sense – sort of – four decades ago – but ultranationalist and controversial dictator Xi Jinping has removed its utility. What comes next – in the interest of democracy and peace in the Indo-Pacific, the vast majority of the US media, academia, and think tank hot takes on Twitters are beside the point. Do we have good enough intelligence on Beijing’s plans and intentions? Are US, Japan, Taiwan, and other democratic allies properly supplied, trained, and coordinated to respond to a Chinese invasion? Are the US, Japan, and EU properly communicating to the Chinese communists the price for an unwise war of choice? If the brave citizens of democratic Ukraine have taught us nothing else, it is that letting a barbarous dictatorship initiate an invasion is a failure for all democracies. 20.9.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Taiwan Republic