The U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R, Mi) drafted the Taiwan Defense Act on June 11th. Following the Taiwan Travel Act (TAA), the TAIPEI Act of 2018, and the Taiwan Assurance Act (TAA) of 2019, the act may pass in the Congress and become a legal obligation of the U.S. Administration soon.
Along with the existing law such as the Taiwan Relations Act, the written
text of the Six Assurance, theses legal documents remark the path of Taiwan’s
post-war reconstruction: from de fact country to legitimate state. The laws are to prevent Taiwan’s democracy
developments and economic achievements from being deprived by the neighboring
power, on the one hand, and build the constitutional foundation for Taiwan as a
political state in the future, on the other hand.
We wrote an
article on November 17, 2017 to alert the decision-makers that the U.S.'s status
quo policy, which originated in the treaty obligation on the U.S. as a
Principal Occupying Power in the Treaty of Peace with Japan, has been remodeled
to be fait accompli in favor of Beijing.
Targeting at the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the draft responses its
intentional moves to distort the “status quo” to “fait accompli.” It also mentions “fait accompli” up to 32
times. The target is the PRC, not China,
echoes the policy of the White House and the Department of State that it is
CCP, not the people of China, which has done wrong.
The draft praises Taiwan as a beacon of Asia democracy, a sovereign
autonomy, and a partner of the Indo-Pacific region that pursuits freedom and
openness.
On the contrary, it emphasizes that Beijing's intentions: its military
modernization is to conquer Taiwan; Beijing imposes its will on the neighboring
countries by coercive power; it keeps the U.S. from entering the trade and
market of the Indo-Pacific region and finally sabotages the U.S. way of
life. It is the question of life and
death to the U.S. The above issues make
the draft legitimate.
The draft presumes that Beijing will take over Taiwan by armed forces and
by a Blitz. Once the “fait accompli” in
favor of Beijing has done, the U.S. will never take it back or reverse the
situation at an unimaginably high cost.
It will convert Taiwan’s role from the assets of the Indo-Pacific
partner to the burden of the U.S.
The policy objects of the U.S. are to delay, degrade, and defeat
Beijing’s intention above. The U.S.
military, thus, has to develop a new concept of combatant, global move pattern,
combined joint operation to maintain the capability to deny PLA. It emphasizes the “blunt layer,” the armed
forces encountering the enemy, and to preserve the freedom of operation within
the long-range precision-fire weapons engagement zone. These detailed scenarios in the law empower
the military commanders the necessary mandates when they are in combat with the
PLA.
Similar to the past Crises of Taiwan Strait, the draft mentioned the
possible scenario of the “limited use of nuclear weapons” by the PLA. The U.S. does not only encounter the PLA but
has to deterrence Russian and North Korea, the other countries in this region
which hold nuclear weapons. It is the
response to China’s
military white paper 2013, in which the PLA, for the first time, does not
mention “No first use” of nuclear weapons, implying that the PLA denounced the
principle. Russia did a similar revision
on June 2nd.
The draft ties the fate of the U.S., the like-minded allies, the
partners, and Taiwan, and vows to defend Taiwan in a nuclear environment.
It is a solemn political stance, which allows no compromise. It is a critical factor Beijing has to
consider with care when it intends to alter the status quo to a new fait
accompli by its armed forces.
【姊妹文章】
美須通過《台灣防衛法》，向中國表明防衛台灣之決心 Joseph Bosco＠The Hill
20200616
An
Act to check Beijing’s fait accompli strategy by HoonTing
沒有留言:
張貼留言
請網友務必留下一致且可辨識的稱謂
顧及閱讀舒適性，段與段間請空一行