Wednesday, September 06, 2006

American Enterprise Institute on Taiwan & Bush Admnistration

Late last month the American Enterprise Institute, the conservative think tank with old ties to the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), editorialized on the Bush Adminstration's stance toward Taiwan in the Wall Street Journal:

After nearly five years of the global war on terror, you'd think the Bush administration would understand the importance of military preparedness. But apparently some lessons are harder to learn than others. U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld last month wrote to the U.S. Congress opposing a measure calling for upgraded military exchanges with Taiwan. Mr. Rumsfeld argued it would interfere with the "President's authority to conduct diplomatic, intelligence, and military activities."

Many years ago when I worked in Washington, I used to think Congress was of limited usefulness on the Taiwan question, but as an AIT staffer pointed out to me, Congress holds regularly meetings on foreign policy issues, is accessible to the public in a way that the administration is not, sends Congresscritters out to visit foreign policy posts, and can, as we see above, provide a much-needed push to a recalcitrant administration. Here the Taiwan caucus has pushed for upgraded military links to Taiwan.

The need for these is obvious. As AEI puts it:

The present situation, under which only more junior military officers, such as colonels and captains, are allowed to visit Taiwan, doesn't work. Only generals and admirals command joint land, sea and air operations, have experience in comprehensive military planning and the bureaucratic authority within the Pentagon to push through new initiatives to help Taiwan.

It is negligent to prohibit American officers with this essential knowledge from familiarizing themselves with the military they may be fighting alongside and the island they may be asked to help protect. Regular visits by senior U.S. military officers would allow them to work with the island to improve its capabilities in threat analysis, force planning, logistics, and operational tactics and procedures.


Current US policy essentially curbs US cooperative exchanges with Taiwan, but then expects that in time of war, we'll be able to carry out coordination of military activities. Anyone remember ABDA?

Four navies, Australian, British, Dutch, and American, were gathered under the command of Dutch Admiral Doorman. Throughout February 1942, Doorman and his command fought a series of battles that were never in the Allies favor, and resulted in the destruction of ABDA as a major threat to the Japanese. Doorman himself was killed during the Battle of the Java Sea (February 27, 1942.)

ABDA suffered from a lack of modern ships, but more so from a lack of coordinated training as a unit. All of the capital ships were lost: HMS Exeter, the cruiser that chased the Nazi pocket battleship Graf Spee to extinction in 1939; USS Houston, HMAS Perth, and the Dutch Navy’s Java and DeRutyer. The Japanese only suffered damage to several destroyers and lost a transport.


The moral of the story is clear: hastily formed mixed commands don't work well and result in needless casualties and military reverses. AEI also points out that the Bush Administration's rejection of increased Taiwan-US military contacts is largely the result of bureaucratic inertia:

Neither international law nor any agreement with China requires this ban, which was first imposed through "guidelines" issued by the U.S. State Department after then-President Jimmy Carter switched formal diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 1979. Moreover, it is a restriction that runs contrary to the logic of the Taiwan Relations Act, which mandates the U.S. to enable Taiwan to "maintain a sufficient self-defense capability," and with the exception of formal diplomatic ties, treat the island as a state in virtually every other respect.

It's almost too easy, but it is hard to avoid writing on US Taiwan policy without mentioning its sad ironies:

It is a strange calculus that drives the U.S. relationship with Taiwan today. In spite of the fact that the island is a fully fledged democracy, a valued player in the global economy, and a partner in the war on terrorism, America treats it with less diplomatic decorum than a country like Syria--all in the name of placating Beijing.

I look forward to enhanced US Taiwan military exchanges. And sell us those F-16s!

No comments: