Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has reminded many of the strained relations between China and Taiwan. But while the situation in Ukraine and Taiwan has three similarities, there are also important differences.
The first similarity is that there is a vast difference in military power between Taiwan and China, as was the case between Ukraine and Russia. Moreover, this gap is getting bigger every year.
Second, neither Ukraine nor Taiwan have formal military allies. Both countries are forced to face threats or attacks alone.
Third, because Russia and China are both permanent, veto-holding members of the UN Security Council, the UN mediation function cannot be relied upon for the conflicts in which they are involved. The same has happened in the case of the current Russian attack on Ukraine, and the same will happen in any crisis on Taiwan.
But the situation around Taiwan is even more uncomfortable. While Taiwan has no ally, it does have the Taiwan Relations Act, a 1979 US law requiring the US to provide Taiwan with military equipment and supplies “necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain sufficient self-defense capability.” ” The law served as a form of compensation for America’s reluctance to explicitly state that it will “protect Taiwan” should it be attacked. Now this system should be changed.
In response to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, the US quickly stated that it would not deploy its troops in defense of Ukraine. But when it comes to Taiwan, the US has pursued a policy of strategic ambiguity. This is the second point of difference: it is not clear whether the US will intervene by force in the crisis involving Taiwan.
Because the US prefers to leave its position undefined on how it will respond to an attack on Taiwan, China is (at least so far) discouraged from military misadventure. This is because the rulers of China must account for the possibility that the US will actually intervene militarily. At the same time, US ambiguity has forced Taiwan to consider the possibility that the US will not intervene militarily, and it has stymied radical pro-independence groups on the island.
America has maintained its janus-facing policy for decades. But third, the most important difference between Ukraine and Taiwan strongly suggests that it is time for the US to reconsider its approach. Simply put, while Ukraine is an independent state, no doubt, Taiwan is not.
Russia’s aggression is not only an armed violation of Ukraine’s territorial sovereignty, but also an attempt to overthrow the government of a sovereign state with missiles and shells. At this point, there is no dispute in the international community over the interpretation of international law and the United Nations Charter. While the extent to which countries participate in sanctions against Russia has varied, no country has claimed that Russia is not in serious violation of international law.
In contrast, China claims that Taiwan is “part of its country” and the US and Japanese position to respect this claim. Neither Japan nor the US have official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, and most countries around the world do not recognize Taiwan as such. Unlike Ukraine, a sovereign state, Chinese leaders can claim that any invasion of Taiwan that China launches is necessary to suppress anti-government activities in its own territories, and that such acts violate international law. Will not done.
When Russia annexed Crimea, the international community eventually agreed, even though Russia violated Ukrainian sovereignty. Given this precedent, it is not surprising that Chinese leaders might expect the world to be more tolerant if they also adopt the logic of ‘regional’ rather than national-subordination.
This argument has destabilized America’s strategic ambiguity. The policy of obscurity worked very well as long as the US was strong enough to sustain it, and as long as China was far less than the US in military power. But those days are over. The US policy of ambiguity towards Taiwan is now fueling instability in the Indo-Pacific region by encouraging China to undermine US resolve, unnecessarily worrying the government in Taipei.
Given the change in circumstances since adopting its policy of strategic ambiguity, the US should issue a statement that is not open to misinterpretation or multiple interpretations. Now is the time for the US to make it clear that it will defend Taiwan against any Chinese aggression.
Whenever I met President Xi Jinping as Prime Minister of Japan, I always made it a rule to tell him clearly that he should not misunderstand Japan’s intention to defend the Senkaku Islands, and also that Japan’s intentions were unshakable. The human tragedy in Ukraine has taught us a bitter lesson. There should now be no room for doubt in our resolve to belong to Taiwan and our resolve to defend freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. ©2022/Project Syndicate
Abe Shinzo is the former Prime Minister of Japan