WeChat Official Account: Xinhua Chinese
During the US presidential election, influential figures and think tanks in the United States have spoken out to protect Taiwan. Vice President Pence during the Trump era said that Taiwan is a barrier against China, and Taiwan's fall could lead to a nuclear arms race, so Taiwan must not fall.
Prominent American scholars and former defense officials have written articles stating that "Taiwan is the Berlin of today." China's unification of Taiwan is the most significant event that could lead to nuclear proliferation in Asia, and the United States cannot afford to lose Taiwan.
Other important think tanks and scholars have also expressed their support for the United States to protect Taiwan.
Pence, who has been silent for a long time, seems to be targeting Trump's policy towards Taiwan. Trump recently said in an interview with Bloomberg News, "Taiwan is 9,500 miles away. It is only 68 miles away from China," and that "Taiwan has taken away all of America's chip business, and Taiwan should pay for its defense to the United States."
Bloomberg News pointed out in its report that Trump believes that defending a small island on the other side of the earth is actually difficult. Pence's strong criticism of Trump's remarks is a typical representation of isolationism, reflecting a dangerous and narrow understanding of America's role in the world and ignorance of the far-reaching consequences of America's disengagement from the world.
Pence and Ed Feulner, the founder of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), wrote an article in The Washington Post titled "We Cannot Give in to Isolationists. Taiwan Must Not Fall," quoting a top-secret document from General MacArthur in 1950, warning that allowing China to dominate Taiwan would seriously harm America's strategic interests and would be "the most serious disaster."
Pence and Feulner said that for more than 70 years, the United States has followed General MacArthur's warning, and supporting Taiwan has always been the cornerstone of America's strategy in the Indo-Pacific region. They explained at length that Taiwan is a barrier against China and communism, and if the United States abandons Taiwan, America's security guarantees will be seen as empty promises, endangering the security and prosperity of the United States and the free world.
In their article, the two expressed their concerns about the emergence of a "new and disturbing isolationism" within the Republican Party, advocating for the abandonment of Taiwan and other allies. They called on the American people not to give in to isolationists and to ensure that Taiwan does not fall.
It is puzzling why Pence and Feulner believe that "Taiwan's fall could lead to a nuclear arms race"? They spent a lot of space elaborating on this viewpoint, but the author noticed that they did not provide any evidence to support their claims, only speculation.
A recent research report titled "Taiwan's Annexation: The United States and Its Allies Cannot Retreat from this Failure" by Professor Alishin from the US Naval War College and Gab Collins, a research fellow at the Baker Institute for Public Policy at Rice University and former China analyst at the US Department of Defense, also stated that this would intensify the nuclear competition between China, the US, and Russia, and India, Pakistan, as well as Japan, South Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Israel may also be forced to develop or increase their nuclear capabilities. However, they did not specifically explain why this would happen.
It is worth noting that this viewpoint has gained widespread support in the US political and think tank circles. The rhetoric is strong and alarmist, deliberately causing panic among US-Western allies to collectively respond to China's unification.
The report compares Taiwan to the former West Berlin, concluding that this Taiwan Strait conflict is a matter of crucial interest to the United States and its allies, the post-World War II international order, and the peace, prosperity, and freedom it supports.
The article warns that if China successfully annexes Taiwan, it will bring catastrophic consequences to the United States. US policymakers must take urgent deterrent action.
This viewpoint has received widespread support from US think tanks.
Brian, an assistant professor at the US Naval War College, appreciates the analogy of Taiwan to West Berlin in the report. He said that the Taiwan issue has become a symbol of US-China relations: "The future of Taiwan will be seen as a benchmark, revealing which side, Beijing or Washington, is more successful in adhering to, maintaining, and expanding its vision of international political operations." He pointed out that if China takes over Taiwan, the biggest impact will be the destruction of the international order that the United States has built and led since 1945. He said that if the United States intervenes but fails to maintain Taiwan's political autonomy, it may seriously damage Washington's credibility, confidence, and reputation in maintaining the existing international order, "especially after Russia's expansion of aggression against Ukraine in 2022."
Brian is also concerned that this may lead many countries to adopt a more pro-China policy and reject the norms and values traditionally supported by the United States, Western Europe, Canada, Australia, and other countries, including freedom of navigation and the protection of human rights.
Senior researcher Yao from the East-West Center in Hawaii said that if China successfully "forcibly annexes" Taiwan, whether China defeats the United States in battle or the United States refuses to intervene, it will mark the end of the United States' strategic advantage in Asia. This will deal a heavy blow to the United States' long-term plan to promote democracy globally.
"Is it worth it for the United States to send troops to Taiwan?"
The report quotes Biden as publicly stating four times that if Beijing uses force against Taiwan, the United States will send troops to defend Taiwan. But unfortunately, the White House later clarified that the US policy towards Taiwan has not changed and there are no plans to abandon the "strategic ambiguity" policy.
The first author of the report, Collins, believes that compared to Ukraine and the Middle East, it is more worthwhile for the United States to use force to defend Taiwan. He calls on the Taiwanese people to learn from Israel's martial spirit. He said that in the Middle East, the United States has basically made it clear that it is willing to use military force to protect about 20% of the global oil supply that is transported from the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf region, but Taiwan accounts for about 90% of the global advanced semiconductor production.
However, the article believes that there is no consensus among the American public on whether the United States should send troops to defend Taiwan. Referring to a survey conducted by the Washington think tank "Defense Priorities," among more than 1,000 Americans surveyed last month, only 30% of respondents said that considering the possible costs, the United States should defend Taiwan and prevent China from invading; 44% of respondents strongly agreed (19%) or somewhat agreed (25%) that it is more important to avoid war with China than to prioritize Taiwan's political autonomy; 66% of respondents believed that the United States should require Taiwan to increase investment in countering China as a prerequisite for the United States' commitment to defend Taiwan.
US national security experts believe that although Taiwan has extraordinary value to the United States, it is worrying that both Taiwan and the United States are currently unprepared in terms of collective morale and psychology and have not reached a social consensus to never compromise with the forces attacking Taiwan.
Brian believes that the psychological preparedness of the American people is far from sufficient: "The American people are simply not ready (and have not been told to be ready) for a major power war, a conflict that would mobilize the resources of the republic, whose intensity and duration may be unprecedented in several generations, perhaps requiring enormous sacrifices in manpower and financial resources."
Brian believes that the psychological cognition of the Taiwanese people is crucial, and the fundamental identity dispute must be resolved, that is, who they are and what political entity (not necessarily the People's Republic of China) they are associated with politically. In his view, the Taiwanese people need to achieve some minimum level of unity and social cohesion on the question of "Who are we?" or "We are definitely not who?".
He once again proposed that Taiwan should fully adopt a "porcupine" strategy and use asymmetric means to counter China's advantages. He also suggested the formation of some kind of civilian militia, increasing strategic reserves of food, fuel, and water, and preparing backup systems for network and physical attacks on critical infrastructure.
Collins called on the Taiwanese people to learn from Israel's martial spirit.
Jonathan Kaverly, a professor at the US Naval War College, recently published an article titled "Taiwan Fallacy" in Foreign Affairs, stating that Taiwan's role in containing China is limited, and the cost of the United States defending Taiwan is too high and not worth it.
After conducting 24 war games, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) found that the US Navy would lose two aircraft carriers and 10 to 20 large surface warships in a Taiwan Strait war, and about 3,200 US military personnel would be killed within three weeks of the war, equivalent to half of the US military casualties in the past 20 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns.
Ah, the American elite class is becoming increasingly anxious about the reunification of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait.