The Trump Administration has confirmed the impending sale of F-16V fighter jets to Taiwan, something against which China has long pushed. In an apparent response to the move, the People’s Liberation Army last Sunday flew its own jets into Taiwan’s airspace — a country China continues to regard as an errant province. The incursion lasted a full 10 minutes and was the most serious such incident in many years.
Taiwan’s democratically elected President Tsai Ing-wen appears to have had enough of Beijing’s sabre rattling, which has stepped up markedly since she was elected in May 2016. Tsai’s Democratic Progressive Party is far less Beijing-friendly than the rival Kuomintang Party which held power for eight years prior to her victory. After Sunday’s events, she has now threatened to “forcibly” turn away any Chinese jets that follow suit.
The US is obligated to help defend Taiwan although this has never been tested. This mounting situation has the potential to upend trade talks between the US and China, and underscores Australia’s invidious position — trapped between the two superpowers on trade and defence.
While attention in recent years has been focused on China’s successful adventurism in the South China Sea where it has converted rocky reefs (many of them permanently submerged) into man-made islands, it is Taiwan itself that is the potential hotspot.
Initially, Chinese leader Xi Jinping promised that the new “islands” in the South China Sea would not be militarised, but it was not long before satellite photos of airstrips, aircraft and naval vessels dismissed his fib. Additionally, since coming into power, Xi has ramped up rhetoric about (re)claiming Taiwan. Earlier this year he explicitly said that China would not “abandon the use of force” and retained the option “of taking all necessary measures” to secure Taiwan.
Perhaps in response, in March the US Navy destroyer USS Curtis Wilbur and the Coast Guard cutter USCGC Bertholf sailed through the Taiwan Strait, a move seen in Taiwan as a show of support.
“The ships’ transit through the Taiwan Strait demonstrates the US commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific,” the US military said in a statement. “The US will continue to fly, sail and operate anywhere international law allows.”
Following this, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said that Beijing had already lodged “representations” with the United States. He added China had urged the US to “cautiously and appropriately handle the Taiwan issue to avoid harming Sino-US relations and peace and stability in the Taiwan strait”.
As America’s trade relationship with China has deteriorated under Donald Trump, pro-Taiwan sentiment appears to be on the rise. Trump was the first US President to speak directly with a Taiwanese president when Tsai called to congratulate him on his 2016 election victory, only six months after her own win. US National Security adviser John Bolton issued what could be seen as a challenge before his own appointment by calling for Beijing’s “one China policy” to be revisited.
All of this has seen many defence analysts voice growing concerns about the situation, with Richard N. Haass from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute describing a China/Taiwan confrontation as “looming”:
For the US, a crisis could require coming to Taiwan’s aid, which could lead to a new cold war or even a conflict with the mainland. A decision, though, to leave Taiwan to its own devices would undermine US credibility and possibly prompt Japan to reconsider its non-nuclear status and alliance with the US.
Many, including the Australian Defence apparatus see China as threat — as highlighted by outgoing Defence Minister Christopher Pyne in a January speech in Singapore that so upset Beijing — but we are likely to have deafening silence on this from both sides in the run up to the election.
As Australian coal and barley traders are pummelled by a Beijing keen to test the mettle of leaders in the election campaign, Morrison launched an attempt at a second China “reset” only to be outshone by Jacinda Ardern, who did the hard yards and flew to Beijing with assurances for Xi.
Meanwhile, Bill Shorten, desperate to mend the damage caused by NSW Labor leader Michael Daley’s “Chinese stealing Australian jobs” gaffe, grandly announced that he “welcomed the rise of China”.
With disturbances between China and Taiwan having quite an impact on Australia, just how long that welcome lasts remains to be seen.
72 hours only. 50% off a year of Crikey and The Atlantic.
Our two-for-one offer with The Atlantic was so popular we decided to bring it back.
But only for 72 hours.
Use the promo code ATLANTIC2020 and you’ll get 50% off a year of Crikey (usually $199) and a year of digital access to The Atlantic (usually $70). That’s BOTH for just $129.
Hurry. Ends midnight this Thursday.
Peter Fray
Editor-in-chief of Crikey
Leave a comment
Reporting on Australia’s relationship with China is part of any Australian news publication’s job. Sainsbury’s diatribes are not dispassionate reporting or even-handed analysis. No Australian should view with equanimity China’s oppression of its minorities in Xinjiang and Tibet but Crikey does itself no favours by acting as a pamphlet for US anti-Beijing spin.
Get a grip! They’ve been at each others throat since before the second world war. Taiwans nearest border is only a couple of kilometers off China’s mainland. Regular ferries commute locals to and from each others ‘regions’. I’d bet it’s still business as usual there.
The airspace involved is way out in the ocean, Taiwan also has militarised islands in the contested seas, there’s a Taiwan presidential election next January, and the link and the article to Richard N. Haass @ ASPI doesn’t note that he’s a war peddling Republican US diplomat.
Mr Sainsbury needs to acquaint himself with actual history. The Chiang Kai Shek government fled to Taiwan in 1949 (which was then occupied by the Japanese, but long part of China). Since then, both the Taiwan administration and the PRC government claim to be the legitimate government of China. NB Not two Chinas or 1 China and 1 Taiwan. In the Shanghai Communique of 1972 the US stated “the US acknowledges that Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is one China and that Taiwan is part of China. The US does not challenge that position.” On 9 February 2017 President Trump confirmed that was still the US position.
The so-called 9 Dash Line in the South China Sea was formulated in 1947 when Chiang was running the mainland. When the Arbitration ruling on the SCS was issued in 2016, it was criticised in identical terms by both the PRC and Taiwan. Taiwan maintains a fortified base on Itu Abu (aka Taiping Island) which is more than 1000km from Taiwan itself.
From 1949 to 1972 the US absurdly insisted that Taiwan was China’s representative on the UN Security Council. If australia has a problem, as Mr Sainsbury insists, then it is only because it tries to maintain an anti-China foreign policy in line with the Americans while at the same time enjoying the economic benefits that come from having China as its largest trading partner by far.
Given their position on the tectonically touchy Rim of Fire, I wonder how the “converted rocky reefs (many of them permanently submerged) into man-made islands will be affected by liquefaction?
Re “NSW Labor leader Michael Daley’s “Chinese stealing Australian jobs” gaffe…” – citation required, as the kiddies say.
One doesn’t expect more than cut’n’paste of the tired old tropes from this writer but that was sub-mudorc.
Cut’n paste indeed. Initially I ignored the link to the article by Haass but on going back and reading it, Sainsbury’s contribution appears to be little more than re-wording of part of that article.
I’m surprised at all the hostile comments to this article. Sainsbury is just stating what the current situation is, namely, China wants to take over Taiwan which wants to maintain its independence, and Australia wants to avoid having to choose between the two. No good burying our heads in the sand and pretending that the conflicting interests don’t exist.