Questioning Tsai Ing Wen’s leadership

The Taiwanese President, Tsai Ing Wen, at the Washington Forum and the Global Taiwan Institute Think Tank claimed that Taiwan will not rely on other states for its defence. Her claims ignore the leadership’s own role in receiving sophisticated armaments from the United States to instigate conflict. Furthermore, such lofty and unrealistic claims conveniently sidestep the role that American commitments of aggressively defending its territory has played in the current situation. The truth is that the Tsai Ing Wen leadership has turned Taiwan into an arms depository under an American security umbrella which is an example of brazen aggression that undermines peace. The peaceful reunification of Taiwan with mainland China is a reality that will materialise and it is worthwhile for Tsai to undertake some soul searching prior to issuing statements which belie on ground dynamics.

Both diplomatic correspondent Edward Wong and, Pentagon correspondent for the New York Times, John Ismay admitted that American officials are intensifying efforts to convert Taiwan into a safe house for ammunition. By referring to the goal of turning Taiwan into a ‘Giant Weapons Depot’, the analysis presented support the rhetoric from Commander of the American naval forces in the Pacific, Admiral Samuel Paparo who said that the United States has the ability to successful pierce China’s military formations in the South China Sea. The high receptivity to arms sales in Taiwan is a stark contrast to Tsai’s remarks on not needing any allies to defend itself when in truth, under her leadership, Taiwan operated under an American security umbrella which has sought to consistently provoke and threaten Chinese sovereignty.

‘We will not rely on others to come to our defence’ also assumes that the leadership never called for separatism or rebellion. This is untrue as nefarious activities from figureheads such as Vice-Speaker Tsai Chi-chang, Foreign Minister Joseph Wu and Taipei’s Washington Representative Bi-khim Hsiao were repeatedly called out by China as attempts to undermine the peaceful development of cross-Strait relations. Instigating confrontations across the straits and seeking political support from US lawmakers and Congressman to promote separatism is conveniently ignored by Tsai Ing Wen as is the role of domestic polity in stirring up trouble by inviting US arms sales. Amid an absence of dialogue or de-escalation calls, the role of such forces in promoting anarchy and discord cannot be ignored.

On arms sales alone, Taipei secured $1.1 billion in September 2022 worth of anti-ship and anti-air to air missiles alongside offensive weapons such as Sidewinder missiles, Harpoon anti-ship missiles and a regional radar system worth $665.4 million as per the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA). The receptivity of offensive weapons in the absence of resistance demonstrates how Tsai Ing-Wen is banking upon the United States to act aggressively and come to Taiwan’s aide as a gross violation of Chinese sovereignty. Her attempt to brandish her ‘self-defence’ claims cannot detract from the fact that Taiwan is using the American security umbrella to provoke the mainland. Hence, there is a disconnect between what is claimed and what is purported.

Tsai Ing-Wen’s leadership is also banking on the Biden administration’s repeated diplomatic faux pas of not abiding by the central tenets of the Taiwan Relations Act which if examined properly, does not involve the US militarily intervening on China’s domestic reunification process. Even on arms sales, the United States bypassed historical understandings between the two sides on the One-China Policy. The hollowness of Tsai Ing Wen’s claims actually corresponds with Biden’s flawed foreign policy on Taiwan which is characterised by relentless arms sales, military build ups, offensive doctrines, tensions and an attempt to break down the deterrence equation.

There must be some degree of importance attached to credible claims of self-defence. The Republic of Korea for example can openly claim that a heavy American military presence in both the country and in close proximity can ward off nuclear threats from the North, particularly as the DPRK brazen tests intercontinental ballistic missiles. Similarly, Japan under Fumio Kishida’s leadership can also tout its security based on a heightened American military presence to cater to threats from China and North Korea. Such security guarantees need to be buttressed with actual ground support, and in Taiwan’s case it’s about plausible deniability, where benefiting from arms purchases goes hand in hand with pushing back against American support.

In the context of the status quo in the Taiwan straits, such comments reflect a bizarre admission of what constitutes credible minimum deterrence today. China is aware of such hollow statements particularly as the leadership in Taipei has been involved in several seditious and separatist activities throughout its history. The ‘One Country, Two Systems’ principle will always apply to Taiwan which has constantly sought to challenge mainland China’s state sovereignty and the peaceful reunification of the island with the mainland is also inevitable.

Hence, Tsai Ing Wen’s claims that Taiwan will not call upon allies to instigate aggression against the mainland is untrue and a gross contradiction of what the leadership in Taipei is actually pursuing. It has to be called out as it is.

The writer is an Assistant Research Associate at the Islamabad Policy Research Institute