Tag: Taiwan

  • As Chipmaking Shifts, Is Taiwan Losing Its Leverage?

    As Chipmaking Shifts, Is Taiwan Losing Its Leverage?

    For Donald Trump, everything has a price. He saw Ukraine’s value in its rare earth minerals, while Taiwan’s significance lies in its semiconductor industry. Setting politics, geopolitics, and strategic importance aside—for Trump, every deal is a business deal. Ukraine has held its ground, but Taiwan has either conceded or been forced to.

    As China reaffirms its claim over Taiwan, most recently in its Two Sessions meetings, Taipei finds itself unable to push back against U.S. demands. More purchases, more contracts, and in return, more security—that defines the current U.S.-Taiwan relationship. Yet, the push to shift semiconductor production to the U.S. has unsettled Taiwan’s opposition. They fear that if chip manufacturing moves, Taiwan’s significance to Washington will fade. And will its “Silicon Shield,” which protects it from China, break if the U.S. no longer sees it as essential?

    TSMC Deal

    For decades, Taiwan’s chip industry has remained anchored on the island, with government regulations limiting companies from moving production overseas. Then came the Trump effect.

    TSMC, Taiwan’s leading semiconductor manufacturer, is departing from tradition by relocating part of its production to the U.S. under American pressure, committing to a substantial investment. However, the deal still hinges on approval from the Taiwanese government—a barrier that has stalled similar efforts in the past. Yet, with Trump’s influence, there is optimism that this time will be different.

    On Monday, TSMC’s chief executive, C.C. Wei, stood alongside Donald Trump at the White House, proudly announcing what he called the largest foreign direct investment on U.S. soil in history. The company, which manufactures the world’s most advanced semiconductors, plans to expand its existing $65 billion U.S. operations with an additional $100 billion investment.

    For TSMC, the deal offers a way to bypass the heavy tariffs Trump has threatened on the global chip industry. For the U.S., it promises tens of thousands of construction jobs and ensures that crucial semiconductor technology is developed domestically—shielded from Chinese control should Beijing attempt to annex Taiwan.

    Taiwanese law requires government approval for any foreign investment exceeding $1.5 billion—a mere fraction of this deal’s scale. President Lai Ching-te has stated that the government will review the agreement with Taiwan’s “national interests” in mind, though approval is expected to be a mere formality.

    Loss of the Infinity Stone

    For Taiwan, losing its semiconductor industry is akin to surrendering an Infinity Stone. Taiwan’s semiconductor industry—anchored by TSMC, its largest and most advanced firm—contributes up to 15% of the nation’s GDP. Often referred to as Taiwan’s “Silicon Shield,” it serves as a strategic asset, ensuring that global stakeholders remain invested in keeping both Taiwan and the world’s chip supply beyond China’s grasp. With Donald Trump signaling a waning personal commitment to Taiwan’s defense, this leverage has only become more critical.

    Opposition figures from the Kuomintang (KMT) argue that shifting semiconductor production to the U.S. could weaken Taiwan’s geo political standing. They caution that as TSMC increases its U.S. operations, Taiwan’s importance to Washington may decline, reducing America’s incentive to support the island in the future.

    What the Government Says 

    Lai’s office has assured that TSMC will keep its most advanced manufacturing processes in Taiwan. However, this statement appears to contradict remarks made by TSMC CEO C.C. Wei and Donald Trump at the White House. Wei stated that the deal would enable the production of the most advanced chips on U.S. soil, while Trump emphasized that the world’s most powerful AI chips would be manufactured in America.

    Despite these concerns, the Ministry of Economic Affairs remains confident, highlighting Taiwan’s semiconductor workforce as its greatest strength. The ministry pointed to the country’s well-established STEM training-to-employment pipeline as a key factor in sustaining its chip industry’s success. According to officials, Taiwan’s semiconductor sector depends on its highly skilled workforce—an advantage that other nations would struggle to replicate.

    However, public concerns over the potential weakening of Taiwan’s “Silicon Shield” continue to grow, putting pressure on the Lai administration to provide clearer answers. In response, President Lai and Wei held a press conference on Thursday. Reflecting on a tense few days of meetings with two presidents, Wei suggested that Lai had urged him to address the media, recognizing their responsibility to explain the situation to the public.

    Will the Deal Strengthen Relations?

    The TSMC-U.S. deal is a strategic move to strengthen Taiwan-U.S. relations. Lai hailed it as a historic milestone, while he and Wei reassured the public that the investment would not undermine TSMC’s domestic operations. Both leaders emphasized that the decision was driven by increasing U.S. customer demand rather than political pressure from Washington.

    This shift can be seen as an effort to curb China’s influence in the global semiconductor supply chain by expanding Taiwan’s production, particularly in the U.S. However, without Taiwan’s highly skilled workforce, the U.S. may find it difficult to surpass China’s chip industry. Even if manufacturing relocates, Taiwan’s expertise will remain critical, making a complete transfer of semiconductor dominance to the U.S. unlikely. Taiwan will continue to be important to the U.S.

  • Will Pager explosions escalate tensions in the Middle East?

    Will Pager explosions escalate tensions in the Middle East?

    Lebanon was rocked by a series of explosions that seemed straight out of a Hollywood spy thriller, with pagers used in a meticulously coordinated attack targeting Hezbollah leaders and Iranian diplomats. While Israel has not publicly claimed responsibility, the precision and scale of the operation bear unmistakable signs of Mossad’s involvement. In what appears to be an intelligence-driven strike, thousands of pagers used by Hezbollah members were detonated simultaneously. Early reports indicate at least twelve deaths and around 3000 injuries across dozens, if not hundreds, of explosions. The attack highlights a relentless drive to strike at Hezbollah, which had adopted pagers as a less traceable communication tool, avoiding the location risks posed by mobile phones.

    Diplomats, netizens, and Iranian officials are certain of Israel’s involvement in these recent attacks, viewing them as part of Mossad’s ongoing campaign against high-profile targets. Initial reports indicate that the pagers, a new model possibly compromised during the supply chain process, were also intended for use in Europe – further evidence pointing to Israeli intelligence. Such tactics are not without precedent. In January 1996, a rigged mobile phone was used to assassinate Yahya Ayyash, Hamas’s chief bomb maker, in Gaza City. Since Israel’s renewed conflict with Hamas, efforts to eliminate militant leaders have intensified. In August, Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas’s political leader, was killed by a short-range projectile in Tehran, prompting Iran to warn of direct military retaliation against Israel.

    As Israel’s war in Gaza approaches its second year, the conflict has expanded beyond Hamas to include the wider “Axis of Resistance”, which encompasses various Iran-backed militias. Bombings, missile strikes, and targeted attacks have become routine between these factions, with increasing clashes along Israel’s northern border with Lebanon, home to the Iran-supported Hezbollah. While a full-scale regional war involving Arab nations, including Lebanon and Iran, seems unlikely, many experts believe the chances of a conflict like the previous Arab-Israeli wars are low. However, Israel’s intensified targeting of key leaders is becoming a major concern for the axis of resistance. The recent pager attack highlights Israel’s capabilities and the opposition’s vulnerability, leaving Hezbollah and others under pressure to restore their standing in the Islamic world. Failure to act could lead to an existential crisis for these groups, as their legitimacy is tied to their fight against Israel. Many predict a potential full-scale war between Hezbollah and Israel, with Hezbollah nearing a possible endgame. Israel’s demands for peace will not be met by eliminating Hamas alone, as Hezbollah continues to pose a similar threat from the north. The likelihood of war appears increasingly imminent, while international negotiations remain ineffective, with the U.S. downplaying the severity of the situation.

    If Israel’s involvement in recent events is confirmed, it would represent a major escalation. Further attacks in Lebanon seem likely, given Israel’s apparent determination to eradicate the threats it faces, potentially targeting Hezbollah as well. With Hezbollah pressured to respond, Israel appears ready for their counteractions. Additionally, Houthi forces and Syrian militants might also need to be cautious of Pagers.

  • How Taiwan Uses History to Resist Reunification

    How Taiwan Uses History to Resist Reunification

    Taiwan and China both lay claim to an ancient Chinese heritage that stretches back through the centuries. Despite diverging historical narratives, each asserts itself as the real China. Officially, they are both still called China – Mainland China as the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan as the Republic of China. Mainland China, guided by the legacy of the Qing Dynasty, claims dominion over regions like Tibet and stakes territorial claims in India and other neighboring countries. This reflects the Communist Party’s sweeping vision of a Greater China – a concept of reunification that aspires to blend both historical and contemporary claims into a unified Chinese identity.

    The vision of a “Greater China” introduces a particular strain for Taiwan, often reduced to the moniker “Chinese Taipei,” a term that subtly undermines its sovereignty. In response, Taiwan has deftly turned the narrative, casting doubt on the very premise of China’s ambitions. How, Taiwan asks, can Beijing champion the idea of reunification while ignoring the territories historically ceded to Russia? If reclaiming lost lands is truly China’s goal, then shouldn’t those lands – seized under humiliating treaties – be part of the equation? Yet, with Beijing and Moscow bound in their modern-day geopolitical dance, this seems unlikely. Taiwan’s position is both sharp and simple: can the dream of Greater China hold weight when it conveniently omits Russia’s territorial gains?

    Taiwan has skillfully reframed the territorial question in a way that could subtly disturb the carefully cultivated alliance between China and Russia. In a recent interview, President Lai Ching-te posed a provocative challenge: if the Chinese Communist Party were truly committed to the principle of territorial integrity, why has it not sought the return of land lost to Russia? Lai, who assumed office in January, pointed to the Treaty of Aigun and the 1860 convention that saw China cede vast swaths of territory – including present-day Vladivostok – to its northern neighbor. And yet, Beijing remains conspicuously silent on the matter.

    Despite the historical loss of territory, Chinese officials have continued to attend Russian economic forums in Vladivostok, a city once part of China’s vast imperial expanse. President Lai implied that this silence on the Russian front casts doubt on Beijing’s proclaimed commitment to territorial integrity. The fixation on Taiwan, he argued, is less about reunification and more about geopolitical ambition. Taiwan’s position within the first island chain of the Pacific would provide the Chinese Communist Party with unparalleled strategic leverage, offering control over critical maritime routes and a commanding presence in the Taiwan Strait.

    Under Xi Jinping’s rule, the Chinese Communist Party has steadfastly maintained that Taiwan is a renegade province, governed by what it calls illegal separatists. Xi’s vision for reunification involves the eventual annexation of Taiwan, a goal rooted in Beijing’s claim that the island has always been part of China, only to be lost to Japan during the country’s so-called century of humiliation. For the CCP, Taiwan stands as the final frontier in its mission to restore China’s territorial integrity.

    In a sharp critique, Taiwan accuses the CCP of prioritizing its ideological kinship with Moscow over its historical roots. This counter-narrative positions the Republic of China – Taiwan – as the rightful steward of Chinese heritage, while casting Communist China as a Soviet creation that continues to cultivate its ties with Russia. The implication is clear: the CCP’s ambitions are geopolitical, not historical, and its fidelity to China’s ancient legacy is, at best, an afterthought.

    Lai’s comment can be viewed through multiple lenses, as it strikes at the heart of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) claims to territorial integrity, the historic narrative of a Greater China, and the sentiment among those who long for reunification. But perhaps more strategically, Lai is targeting the delicate relationship between China and Russia – a bond that, for now, appears unshakable. Economically, politically, and strategically, these two nations act in concert, with China helping to soften the blow of Western sanctions on Russia, and Russia lending support to China’s geopolitical maneuvers. Both countries, their modern borders shaped by 19th-century wars and treaties, seem to present a unified front. 

    Yet, by invoking these historical accords, Taiwan is making a shrewd move. Lai’s remarks could plant the seeds of discord between China and Russia, forcing them to confront uncomfortable questions about their past and potentially weakening their current alliance. The subtle reminder of past territorial losses to Russia – territories that Beijing has quietly overlooked – could stir old wounds and reveal fractures in their partnership that both governments have long worked to conceal.

  • What Does the Influx of Western Investments in Malaysia Mean?

    What Does the Influx of Western Investments in Malaysia Mean?

    In Asian politics, two major alliances are emerging: one led by the United States, with Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, and Singapore, and the other led by China, including Russia, North Korea, and Iran. However, there are still players in the region that have not joined either side but whose moves can shift the power balance. These countries skillfully open up to both parties, using the rivalry as an opportunity. Malaysia can be counted among these.

    Malaysia is a country that always keeps close ties with the US; it has strong military and economic relationships with the US and is a place where many Western companies Asian businesses operate. However, unlike other United States allies in the region, Malaysia does not distance itself from China, economically or politically. Malaysia maintains a warm relationship with China and is part of the Belt and Road Initiative. Even though Malaysia receives significant investments from the United States, China is now Malaysia’s biggest trade partner. There are many doubters who believe that Malaysia’s Islamic identity and increasing authoritarian nature in administration could lead it to side with China or remain neutral. Being strategically located, Malaysia’s neutrality would be a setback for the USA.

    However, the influx of investments, including in the semiconductor industry, is flowing to Malaysia from the West. These investments are not only meant for economic growth but also serve as a political strategy. This substantial amount of investment could help Malaysia join the list of developed countries and ultimately become part of the Asian NATO.

    The semiconductor industry is increasingly important in the digital era, and the world seeks alternatives beyond Taiwan. Malaysia understands this opportunity and is setting up infrastructure to capitalize on it. However, it’s not just about business; investing in such an important sector also requires considering the country’s political and economic policies. Investments will flow into the country only if it is politically stable and aligns with Western interests. It is important to note that Malaysia has successfully attracted Western companies in this sector. Prominent companies like Intel and Infineon have invested $7 billion, NVIDIA is preparing to invest $4.3 billion in an AI data center, and Texas Instruments has allocated $3.1 billion for two new semiconductor assembly facilities. Other significant investors include Bosch, AT&S, Ericsson, and Simtech. This aligns perfectly with Malaysia’s aim to become a high-tech economy.

    It needs to be considered that the U.S. is giving a green light to investments because they want to keep Malaysia aligned with them. Malaysia holds an important geopolitical position, connecting the South China Sea to the world. Supporting Malaysia and facilitating its semiconductor ambitions is part of the United States’ strategy. Although Malaysia is already involved in the semiconductor industry with local firms like Tera and Upstar, which handle high-end technologies such as wafer fabrication and IC designs, Malaysia is expecting $107 billion in investments to position itself as the next Taiwan. The “Kuala Lumpur 2030” initiative aims to establish the country as a global hub for semiconductor manufacturing. All this is possible with foreign investments, and the influx of money from the West will help achieve this dream. Through these investments, Malaysia will become increasingly dependent on the United States, paving the way for its inclusion in the emerging Asian NATO. The investment pattern, which includes not only Western countries but also South Korea and Japan, highlights the broad scope of collaboration among these nations and supports the United States Asian NATO initiative.

  • Is Taiwan’s Democracy Under Threat?

    Is Taiwan’s Democracy Under Threat?

    Taiwan, or the Republic of China, is the “Model China” for the West, mainly because of two reasons: one is hatred towards communism, and the other is democracy. Even though the country was founded under the authoritarian leader Chiang Kai-shek, Taiwan is included in the category of full democracy and ranked 10th globally in the Economist Democracy Index, indicating that the country has one of the best democratic systems. However, the introduction of PRC-like controversial reform bills is raising concerns about democracy in the state. Inside and outside the parliament, protests are intensifying, and experts believe that, in the name of protecting the island from mainland China’s interests, and crackdown of corruption, Taiwan is becoming increasingly authoritarian.

    Taiwan’s opposition-controlled parliament has passed a controversial reform bill despite heavy protests. The bill seeks to expand the legislature’s power to call on and question officials, military figures, and citizens, as well as demand documents. It is perceived as an attempt to establish complete control over people, reminiscent of the Chinese Communist Party’s laws. After days of hostile debate and physical fights between MPs inside, and mass protests by citizens outside, the bill passed in the Legislative Yuan, Taiwan’s parliament. The bill passed 58 votes to 45, after a third reading on Tuesday evening in Taipei, during which there were further scuffles and members of the ruling party threw paper planes and hurled garbage bags at the opposition.

    The bills were driven by the two major opposition parties, the nationalist Kuomintang (KMT) and the populist Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), which together hold a majority in parliament after gaining ground over the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in January’s elections. The KMT-TPP legislative majority coalition is seeking to introduce a set of powers for improved institutional checks and balances, legislative strengthening, and democratic consolidation. These powers include the power to investigate, the power of inquiry, contempt resolutions, a normalized presidential address to the legislature, and the power to confirm appointments.

     When the final votes were tallied, triumphant KMT and TPP legislators waved small balloons shaped like suns. Proponents say legislative reform is needed in Taiwan for greater accountability and argue that these bills are similar to some that the ruling DPP attempted to introduce when they had a legislative majority. Remnants of over a week of hostilities and late-night deliberations, such as placards, flowers, and stacks of furniture, encircled the parliamentarians, while tens of thousands of protesters gathered outside. After the bill passed, KMT caucus whip Fu Kun-chi announced that the opposition would create a special task force to investigate alleged corruption within the DPP.

    The ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) told the media it would reject the new bill and the President will send it back for review, seeking a legal ruling on its constitutionality. Despite having worked on similar bills when they held a majority in parliament, Caucus Whip Ker Chien-ming stated that the bill’s content was “Absolutely Unconstitutional” and questioned the legality of the voting process. The DPP accused the opposition of using the reforms to undermine President Lai Ching-te’s administration, which was formally inaugurated last Monday. The DPP and its supporters claim that the opposition is undermining Taiwan’s democratic processes to push the bill through, Contending that the proposed law could be readily exploited to target political adversaries and disrupt the operations of Lai’s administration.

    The protests are the largest Taiwan has seen since the 2014 Sunflower Movement, a time that many protesters this week referenced and drew inspiration from. Outside the building, tens of thousands of individuals congregated to protest against the bills for the third time in a week. The protest movement was named the Bluebird Movement, a name orthographically similar to Qingdao East Road, where the main protests took place. The rallies featured a full day of speakers and musical acts. Crowds surged as work and school concluded, coinciding with the passage of the bill.

    With the president and the ruling party at odds with the opposition-majority parliament, ongoing conflicts are expected to persist, posing a significant challenge for newly inaugurated President Lai. He must navigate political adversaries in the parliament while also addressing China’s threats to annex Taiwan. However, it is evident that such bills, whether proposed by the DPP or the opposition alliance, will weaken Taiwan’s democratic system. Without a robust democracy, there will be little difference between Taiwan and Mainland China.

  • How Could Taiwan’s New President Escalate Tensions With China?

    How Could Taiwan’s New President Escalate Tensions With China?

    Taiwan’s new president, Lai Ching-te, took charge on Monday at the presidential office in central Taipei. Lai won January’s election in a three-way race, but his party, the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), does not have a legislative majority. Instead, the two major opposition parties, the Kuomintang (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), now hold the most seats. Lai took over from his predecessor, Tsai Ing-wen, whom he had served as vice-president. Both Lai and the new vice-president, Hsiao Bi-Khim, who previously served as Taiwan’s top envoy to Washington, and championed Taiwan’s sovereignty. Lai, known for his tougher stance against Beijing in the past, called for an independent Taiwan. However, now he seems to advocate a more moderate policy path focused on protecting the status quo, maintaining Taiwan’s sovereignty, and deterring Chinese aggression. During his inauguration speech at the Imperial Stadium, he did not avoid criticizing China and its interest in Taiwan, which assured discontent in mainland China.

    Lai Ching-te urged China to “cease their political and military intimidation against Taiwan and to keep the world free from the fear of more war” in his inauguration speech. This strong warning could preclude the possibility of diplomatic resolutions through talks between Chinese and Taiwanese leaders. Lai’s speech affirmed the administration’s plans to build up its defensive and deterrent measures as tensions rise in the region and the United States increases its efforts to counter China. The President also cautioned his people not to harbor any delusions about China, especially as protests against bills in parliament, which the government considers influenced by China, continue to rise. 

    Many experts believe that through his inauguration speech, Lai promotes Taiwanese identity over Chinese identity. Tsai, Lai’s predecessor, often relied on the ambiguities within the Taiwan Constitution, especially regarding the concept of “One China”. Beijing asserts that this concept includes Taiwan under PRC rule, with both sides identifying themselves as China. She often referred to the “two sides of the Strait” instead of using the names of the two countries, avoiding complications since both countries officially use the name “China”. In contrast, Lai’s speeches rejected some of these ambiguities in favor of explicit statements. He asserted that the constitution clearly says “ The Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China are not subordinate to each other”. However, Lai has previously demonstrated skepticism regarding the Republic of China (ROC) constitution as the basis for cross-strait affairs. While Lai promoted greater Taiwanese pride during his inauguration speech, he also stated that he would work towards resuming tourism between Taiwan and China, which is currently under tight restrictions. Many people in Taiwan have social, cultural  and business ties with Mainland China and desire a return to a friendly relationship, even though they do not support Beijing’s unification plan.

    Lai’s takeover and inauguration speech definitely made Beijing uncomfortable. China has reportedly set a goal of being capable of militarily taking over Taiwan by 2027, and the recent Two Sessions continue to work towards reunification. This timeframe falls within Lai Ching-te’s first term, and having a leader like Lai in Taipei during this period will surely challenge the Chinese dream. In the past, Beijing has employed various methods to pressure Taiwan into accepting annexation, including economic coercion, propaganda drives, diplomatic isolation, and military showdowns. All these actions are expected to continue. China claims democratic Taiwan as a province and has labeled Lai a “Dangerous Separatist” who will bring “War and Decline” to the Chinese island. The Chinese Communist Party and People’s republic of China established in 1949 has never ruled over Taiwan, but Xi Jinping has declared that what he terms “Reunification” is inevitable, as communist party wishes to extend China with all Sinosphere including the regions now including neighboring states. 

    An entire page of the national party newspaper, China Daily, was devoted to Beijing’s response on Tuesday.   Beijing has warned of undefined reprisals against Taiwan and expressed their strong discontent on the inauguration speech of new president Lai Ching-te, in which he maintained his government’s position on sovereignty , uprise Taiwanese identity and did not concede to Beijing’s claim that Taiwan is a province of China. In a statement late Tuesday, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) called Lai’s speech “A downright confession of Taiwan independence”. The TAO emphasized reunification and warned they would counterattack and punish the DPP authorities for colluding with external forces to pursue “independence” provocations. Beijing also noted that any speech by a president belonging to the DPP, Lai’s party, short of capitulating to that position was likely to provoke an angry response.

    While the DPP and President Lai Ching-te focus on issues with China and Tensions in the South China Sea, many believe the government is using this to cover up the real issues in Taiwan. Domestic challenges are rising, including housing costs, the wealth divide, and cost of living pressures. His inauguration was marked by large protests against the opposition over a controversial bill in parliament, foreshadowing a difficult first term for Lai, who lacks a legislative majority. There were protests against the bill in the parliament and in the streets. The government is adeptly using anti-China sentiment to suppress these protests, similar to tactics in authoritarian countries, labeling those who oppose the governments as anti-nationals. Many fear that Taiwan is sacrificing democracy in the name of protecting itself from communism.

  • How Does US Foreign Aid Package Benefit Taiwan?

    How Does US Foreign Aid Package Benefit Taiwan?

    Taiwan, along with Ukraine and Israel, receives a significant amount of funds and help as part of the US-declared Foreign Aid Package. After much delay and contentious debate, and following calls from Ukraine, the foreign aid bill was signed by United States President Joe Biden last Wednesday. Three countries are  benefiting directly from the bill and receiving significant amounts of money. One is Ukraine, which is engaged in a strong war with Russia and is in high demand for money and weapons. Another country is the conventional ally, Israel, which is in conflict with Hamas and also in need of money and aid from the United States. The third is Taiwan, whose inclusion is interesting because they are not currently at war. However, it needs to be considered that the United States expects more tensions in the region, and is preparing for it.

    The foreign aid package, amounting to $95 billion in aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan, contains provisions that have a broad impact on many parts of the Asia-Pacific region. Through the bill, House Republicans allocated $8.1 billion for the Indo-Pacific region, framing it as an effort to counter the People’s Republic of China, which claims Taiwan and the entire South China Sea. Within the foreign aid package, $2 billion is earmarked for the foreign military financing program, benefiting Taiwan and other security partners in the Indo-Pacific, all of whom are deemed crucial in confronting Chinese aggression according to the US. This financing program enables eligible partner nations to procure US defense articles, services, and training. Additionally, $1.9 billion will support defense-related expenses for Taiwan and other regional partners, while $542 million will specifically enhance US military capabilities in the region which will bolster regional deterrence.

    The primary allocation of funding within the bill is directed towards projects within the United States itself. $3.3 billion from the bill is allocated to bolster the domestic submarine-building industry. Of this amount, $1.9 billion is specifically designated for the Columbia-class submarine, the latest class of nuclear-powered submarines for the United States. An additional $200 million is allocated for a Virginia-class submarine as well. The majority of these funds will be invested domestically, benefiting over 16,000 suppliers across all 50 states. The inclusion of submarine funding was a prerequisite for congressional approval of the Aukus deal involving the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia. Its purpose is to ensure that the United States can fulfill Australia’s requirement for Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines without compromising its own capability needs. Therefore, this package will contribute to the US economy and US foreign relationships simultaneously.

    The delay in passing the bill sparked significant criticism against the government both inside and outside the US. A significant outcry arose from Ukraine, which is currently in urgent need of financial assistance. However, it wasn’t easy for the United States; there were protests against spending US taxpayers’ money on Ukraine and war, with arguments advocating for peace talks with Russia. Additionally, Israel being another beneficiary led to further delays, as Israel’s aggressive stance resulted in numerous civilian deaths in Gaza, demanding the US to intervene and halt the conflict. Protests are mounting in the US, with participation from many students, human rights activists, and Islamic communities. Additionally, there are many people who are against funding Taiwan. They fear that increased financial support and weapon systems provided to the Asia-Pacific region will escalate tensions. However, such actions are deemed necessary by the US to stimulate its economy, given the need for government spending and pressure from businesses.

    Taiwan considers the aid package essential for its defense and expresses concerns about China’s potential future aggression. Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen applauded the foreign aid package. According to Beijing’s Taiwan Affairs Office, the aid gravely breaches  US obligations to China and sends the wrong message to separatists seeking Taiwan’s independence. China is concerned about this development since the US is expected to gain more influence in the region as a result of the Foreign Aid Package for Taiwan, which would draw other nations closer to the US. The political environment in Asia Pacific will change as a result of these measures. China, which considers Taiwan its own territory, has consistently urged a halt to arms supplies, while the United States continues to be Taiwan’s most significant international supporter and arms supplier despite the lack of formal diplomatic ties. Thus, it is certain that the foreign aid package will impact the balance of power in the area.

  • The Debate Over Chiang Kai Shek Statues in Taiwan

    The Debate Over Chiang Kai Shek Statues in Taiwan

    There is a worldwide trend of erasing certain parts of history by removing statues and monuments. This phenomenon has been widely observed in Europe and America, where statues of slave traders have been taken down. Similarly, this trend has been evident in Eastern European states and former communist countries, where statues of communist leaders have been removed. Taiwan is poised to join this trend by accelerating the move to remove statues of former dictator Chiang Kai-shek. However, there is opposition to this initiative. Debates are raging about Chiang Kai-shek statues, who is widely regarded as the founder of Taiwan, despite his support for the One China policy.

    In 2018, when the DPP’s Tsai Ing-wen held the presidency, the government established a transitional justice committee to investigate the rule of the former generalissimo, who served as the president of the Republic of China (ROC) in both China and Taiwan until his death in 1975. Many people continue to view Chiang Kai-shek, the Kuomintang leader of China, as part of the Republic of China formed in Mainland China under Sun Yat-sen, for many, he is remembered as someone who fought for democracy against communism before being exiled to Taiwan and continuing the Republic of China from there, thereby giving Taiwan a separate identity. However, for many Taiwanese people, he is seen as a Chinese military dictator who ruled the islands for decades under strict martial law and then transferred power to his son, as like the communist regime in Korea. By the end of martial law implemented by Chiang Kai-shek in 1987, as many as 140,000 people were estimated to have been imprisoned and another 3,000 to 4,000 executed for actual or perceived opposition to his party. Many argue that the island lost its identity and became a home of the Chinese exiled government, he was advocating for a One China policy that Taiwan doesn’t agree with. Chiang Kai-shek’s legacy remains a point of contentious debate, though the Justice Committee’s recommendation was to remove thousands of Chiang Kai-shek’s statues from public spaces.

    Taiwan’s government has pledged to accelerate its efforts in response to calls for the removal of statues of Chiang Kai-shek.  This pledge was made in response to criticism that the government was not moving quickly enough.  Taiwan is adorned with statues of Chiang, and for years, the government and society have been engaged in debate over what to do with them, particularly the largest one inside Taipei’s Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall. Many statues have already been relocated, often to a park in northern Taipei, which has become famous for the thousands of Chiang likenesses arranged around its grounds. Indeed, Chiang Kai-shek strengthened Taiwan and prevented it from being invaded by the People’s Republic of China or Communist China. Chiang established defense training academies in Taiwan. Some in Taiwan argue that his legacy must be considered alongside his successes, pointing out that he also spearheaded Taiwan’s path to economic prosperity, and fought against both the Communists and the Japanese. The continued presence of the KMT as a major political party is seen as evidence of the people’s forgiveness toward Chiang.

    Chiang Kai Shek’s legacy has long been a point of political contention in Taiwan. The discourse surrounding Chiang’s legacy is predominantly split along party lines, as the ruling Democratic Progressive Party advocates for discontinuing ongoing tributes, while the opposition Kuomintang Party accuses them of attempting to erase history. However, the DPP has encountered allegations of seeking to “de-sinicize” Taiwan by advocating for the cessation of Chiang’s memorialization. The party maintains a pro-Taiwan sovereignty stance, in contrast to the KMT’s ongoing embrace of Taiwan’s historical and cultural connections with China. Additionally, the KMT has voiced opposition to the transitional justice commission and its unfavorable findings against the party. The issue is now more political, and it will not be easy for the government to take actions faster. However, by removing Chiang Kai Shek statues, Taiwan is not only erasing the memories of the bad days under military rule but also severing ties with China. In the process, Taiwan will develop a distinct identity and history.

  • Drowning Diplomacy: Taiwan’s Receding Influence Across Pacific Islands

    Drowning Diplomacy: Taiwan’s Receding Influence Across Pacific Islands

    Taiwan—officially known as the Republic of China (ROC)—has it all: a strong international ally, a military, a vibrant economy, a sovereign currency, passports that are recognized around the world, individual postage stamps, a distinctive internet top-level domain, and a constitution which governs by a president who is chosen democratically. Despite all of this, Taiwan is still lacking a vital component: recognition.

    For Taiwan, being acknowledged as a free and independent state is paramount, with recognition from supportive nations considered the most valuable asset, especially in the face of mounting pressures from Beijing. Unfortunately, Taiwan is facing adversity. Among the 11 United Nations member states maintaining full diplomatic relations with Taiwan, three are Pacific nations witnessing China’s assertive expansion of influence, marking a significant setback for Taiwan’s dream of global recognition as a free and independent state. 

    Once a founding member of the United Nations, the Republic of China (ROC) now finds itself without official membership or observer status within the organization. This predicament arises from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), Mainland China, strategically blocking the ROC on the international stage. The PRC refuses diplomatic relations with any nation maintaining ties with the ROC and imposes a requirement on these nations to make a statement on its claims to Taiwan.

    As a consequence, only 11 UN member states and the Holy See currently uphold official diplomatic relations with the Republic of China. This recognition from 11 states is often perceived as a component of American diplomacy, with the United States and its influenced countries supporting the ROC to preserve Taiwan’s reputation as a free nation, entangled in the intricacies of power politics. However, the current global landscape, characterized by a weakened United States and the ascendance of Mainland China, casts doubt on the sustainability of this status quo.

    About five years ago, Taiwan had six Pacific allies with full diplomatic relations. But they lost three allies rapidly. With Nauru officially severing ties in January, only three steadfast nations—Tuvalu, the Marshall Islands, and Palau—now remain within Taiwan’s diplomatic orbit. Despite relentless lobbying from Beijing and alluring promises of economic and developmental support, these three nations persist in their allegiance to Taiwan. Their commitment is said to be rooted in democratic principles and cultural values, prevailing reasons they consider paramount in maintaining their diplomatic ties with Taipei.

    Tuvalu, standing as one of the last bastions maintaining diplomatic ties with Taiwan, defiantly challenges Beijing’s One China principle, eliciting a keen response from the Chinese government. Though after recent elections, these Pacific nations delicately navigate pragmatic considerations against enduring values. The recently appointed prime minister of Tuvalu faces a dual challenge, addressing immediate domestic concerns while grappling with broader regional issues, notably Tuvalu’s role in the intense political struggle for influence in the Pacific. The departure of the staunch Taiwan supporter, Natano, leaves behind a legacy that the incoming leader may contemplate, particularly as one prime ministerial candidate hints at a potential shift towards establishing relations with China.

    The specific geographic positions of Palau and the Marshall Islands render them susceptible to sustained pressure from Beijing, a dynamic that unfolds against the backdrop of their strategic importance. Situated in the second island chain, these nations are perceived to wield military and strategic influence, not only for traditional global powers but also for China, adding a layer of complexity to their diplomatic landscape.

    Palau, an archipelago nestled in the western Pacific Ocean, finds itself particularly exposed to Beijing’s relentless efforts to shift allegiances. President Surangel Whipps Jr of Palau revealed about  the consistent overtures made by Chinese officials to his government, utilizing economic promises as a persuasive tool in this geopolitical tug of war. Similarly, Tuvalu’s foreign minister, Simon Kofe, reported in 2019 that Chinese companies sought to exploit concerns about rising sea levels, offering to build artificial islands in Tuvalu to weaken its ties with Taiwan.

    President Whipps accuses Beijing of employing what he terms “economic coercion,” highlighting restrictions on the number of tourists permitted to travel to Palau. This tactic not only disrupts the flow of visitors but also serves as a form of economic pressure, impacting a crucial revenue stream for Palau’s tourism sector. The multifaceted approach underscores China’s strategic maneuvers in shaping the geopolitical landscape of the Pacific, revealing the intricate interplay between economic inducements, strategic interests, and regional influence.

    China unmistakably holds a considerable advantage over Taiwan in terms of resources. China was enticed by substantial aid pledges, as exemplified by the Solomon Islands in 2019. China’s doubled discretionary funds for MPs and financing of a $53 million sports stadium in Honiara showcase its impactful approach. In contrast, Taiwan, lacking the same economic might, adopts a different strategy, focusing on more modest yet impactful initiatives. The development agency prioritizes projects in health, agriculture, and livestock, exemplified by endeavors like supporting a piggery initiative in the Marshall Islands and establishing a vegetable farm on a remote island in Tuvalu.

    The small Pacific archipelago states are experiencing a transformative shift fueled by foreign aid dynamics. These nations, grappling with the substantial risks of climate change, find themselves in need of infrastructure development for adaptation and seek avenues to generate income, particularly through tourism. Historically, they aligned with the United States, benefiting from the aid it provided. In return, the U.S. wielded its financial influence to garner support in international bodies, utilizing these nations as essential allies in various voting scenarios.

    However, the landscape is changing, as China emerges as a potent player. The current perceived weakness in the U.S. administration provides an opportunity for China to capitalize on the void effectively. Politicians in these island nations, eager to receive funds that can be directed toward local development instead of relying on tourism and aid from Western nations, find this shift appealing. The financial incentives become a driving force, overshadowing the cultural ties that are often quoted. The possibility of a gradual disengagement from diplomatic relations looms large as Taiwan navigates the complex web of financial interests and political maneuvers. In the context of shifting geopolitical currents, China’s compelling economic offers have a significant impact, creating alliances and changing the diplomatic landscape among small Pacific island states. The complicated dynamics provided Taiwan and the US with the opportunity to reassess its approach and manage the challenges posed by shifting regional allegiances.

  • What does Taiwan’s General Election mean for South East Asia?

    What does Taiwan’s General Election mean for South East Asia?

    Taiwan’s presidential election last week captured global attention as Lai Ching-te from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) emerged victorious as the newly elected president, defeating rivals Hou Yu-ih of the Kuomintang and Ko Wen-je of the Taiwan People’s Party. This landmark win represents the first time a political party in Taiwan has secured a third consecutive presidential term. Despite this achievement, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lost its legislative majority, leaving no single party with sufficient votes to govern independently.

    Since the early 1990s, the political landscape in Taiwan has been predominantly shaped by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Kuomintang (KMT). Led by front-runner Lai Ching-te, the DPP originated from the anti-authoritarian protest movement, but after eight years in power, it is increasingly perceived as an establishment party. The DPP advocates for safeguarding independence and peace by fostering closer ties with other countries, particularly emphasizing a strong relationship with the United States.

    Despite Taiwan’s relatively small size and a population of around 24 million, its election has drawn global attention due to security concerns arising from China’s looming threat of annexation. With the DPP returning to power, the alliance between Taiwan and the United States is expected to strengthen, and escalating tensions between Taiwan and China.

    The Taiwan issue has become a major obstacle in Sino-U.S. relations, impeding efforts to de-escalate tensions. As the post-Covid pandemic world order unfolds, China’s aspirations of global dominance are getting challenged and the chance of China taking assertive measures in Taiwan and the South China Sea becomes evident. Economic slowdown, population decline, and increased self reliance of countries make China more susceptible to aggressive actions in these regions.

    Within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), all 10 member states maintain One China policies, demonstrating unity on this front. However, in the event of a Taiwan contingency, the situation swiftly transforms into a humanitarian challenge, with countries grappling to safely and promptly evacuate their citizens. The complexity of this scenario is exacerbated by variations in humanitarian and disaster relief capabilities among Southeast Asian states.

    April 2023 statistics from Taiwan’s Ministry of Labor reveal a substantial presence of migrant workers, with approximately 256,000 Indonesians, 257,000 Vietnamese, and 154,000 Filipinos in Taiwan. In contingency scenarios, the welfare and safety of these Southeast Asian populations become paramount concerns for their respective home countries.

    Beyond the significant number of Southeast Asian nationals in Taiwan, nations in the region face the delicate task of balancing potential U.S. requests for assistance against pressures from China to maintain neutrality. China’s extensive investments in Southeast Asian countries, such as the One Belt One Road project, have fostered growing favor toward China among media and the public in nations like Myanmar and Indonesia. Movements against nations perceived as unfavorable to China, as seen in concerns over the Thailand canal project, serve as a cautionary signal for Singapore and Malaysia, which exhibit a more pro-U.S. stance. Southeast Asian nations, particularly Malaysia and Singapore, play pivotal roles as hubs for U.S. and European businesses in Asia, intensifying their reliance on the U.S.

    The increasing financial support from China to countries like Indonesia adds a layer of complexity, potentially causing a regional divide if challenges arise. While Southeast Asian countries have no direct impact from Taiwan’s electoral outcomes, they must carefully determine their responses to the evolving impact on U.S.-China relations and regional security.