Next year, Taiwan will begin producing its first land attack cruise missile, the Hsiung Feng-2E (Brave Wind).Production of the HF-3 antiship missile will probably begin next year, reports Defense News. Max Hirsch of Kyodo reports on the arms freeze, with a nifty quote from the ever quotable John Tkacik:
First to come off the line will be a 600-kilometer variant that completed test-firings in 2004. An 800-kilometer variant, which wrapped testing this year, could be canceled due to warming relations with China.
“This is basically a tactical weapon designed for use against military target sets, particularly air-defense fire units and command-and-control facilities,” a Taiwan defense analyst said.
“The missile’s relatively small warhead size and the rather limited number of missiles planned for procurement clearly suggest that this is not a counter-value weapon.”
That would seem to soothe U.S. fears that the HF-2E could be used as a “first strike” weapon, something Taiwan agreed not to develop. “I think much of the U.S. concern over Taiwan’s development of something like the HF-2E has been the irresponsible rhetoric that certain Taiwan politicians — often on both sides of the aisle — used when discussing the weapon and its purpose — for example, threatening to attack Shanghai or the Three Gorges Dam,” the analyst said.
“The U.S. finds such behavior even more destabilizing than Taiwan’s possession of a land-attack missile capability per se.”
Included in the alleged freeze are pending deals on some 90 military helicopters, including 30 Apache attack helicopters, defensive missile batteries and plans for conventional attack submarines.
A June report in the Washington Post quoted a U.S. government insider as saying the freeze came at the request of Ma for fear the deals, if allowed to proceed, would derail his plans to bury the hatchet with rival China.
Ma, of the ruling Nationalist Party (KMT), took office May 20 on the back of vows to improve ties with Beijing, which claims Taipei as its own and has vowed to bring the self-ruled island under its political fold, by force if necessary.
The Ma administration, for its part, has denied reports that it requested the freeze, while the U.S. State Department denies that such a freeze even exists. Proponents of the deals, however, generally place the blame on Washington.
''President George W. Bush, personally, has denied Taiwan the defense systems it needs to maintain even the semblance of a military balance in the Taiwan Strait, and part of the rationale in Washington is, 'Well, President Ma is making such good progress in his talks with China, let's not stir things up,''' says John Tkacik, a former diplomat and official at the Heritage Foundation, a U.S. think tank.
The United States is legally obligated to provide defensive arms to Taiwan -- an obligation that Washington is ignoring to appease Beijing as the latter's political, economic and diplomatic powers increase, Tkacik says.
''The State Department,'' he adds, ''has evidently decided that Taiwan's future security is much better entrusted to China than to the United States.''
The Taiwan-US defense conference is being held this September 28-30, with a big topic being the freeze. Defense News has another piece on it:
"The Defense Industry Conference is the most important private event reviewing U.S.-Taiwan defense and security issues each year," Hammond-Chambers said. "Senior representatives from Taiwan's Ministry of National Defense, the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Department of State will give keynote speeches at the event."And if you get the chance, read this article in WaPo about China, the fading of NASA, and US international status. It's incredible to me that after 8 years of damage and destruction to virtually every aspect of the United States, that anyone is voting Republican this year.
So far, the conference has not identified officials from Taiwan's Ministry of National Defense attending the conference. There are unconfirmed reports that Chen Chao-min, Taiwan's minister of national defense, will attend and give a speech.
"In addition, a high-caliber group of leading U.S. and Taiwan experts will address many important topics and will engage our attendees in an informative dialogue on shared issues and concerns," Hammond-Chambers said.
Confirmed U.S. speakers include Paul Wolfowitz, former U.S. deputy secretary of defense, now chairman, U.S.-Taiwan Business Council; Randy Schriver, Armitage International; Mark Hall, director, Information Assurance Policy & Strategy, U.S. Department of Defense; Capt. John Figuerres, chief, Northeast Asia Policy Division, Strategic Planning & Policy Directorate, U.S. Pacific Command; and John Anderson, chief, Technical Section, American Institute in Taiwan (the de facto U.S. Embassy).
Nongovernmental Taiwan speakers will include Fu S. Mei, director, Taiwan Security Analysis Center; Alexander Huang, professor of strategic studies and director of American studies at Tamkang University; Lin Chen-wei, director, Department of International Affairs, of the opposition Democratic Progressive Party; and Michael Tsai, former minister of national defense, now honorary deputy chairman, Institute for Taiwan Defense and Strategic Studies.
Session topics this year include long-range planning for Taiwan's future military needs, military modernization and the drive toward an all-professional force, and indigenous production and industrial cooperation.
Breakout session topics include the implications of the weaponization of space and China's space program, as well as Taiwan's current and future space programs; network and information security challenges and cyber-war preparedness from both a U.S. and a Taiwan perspective; and the implications the U.S. presidential election could have for Taiwan.
[Taiwan]
11 comments:
Let's be honest here. You should not be at all surprised that people are willing to vote Republican. Obama makes many people uneasy. And if you have a complicated problem, you won't turn to an uncertain repairman to fix it. Likewise, most non-Democrats don't really see McCain as a Bush extension. If Obama were truly a strong choice, he would have a double-digit lead by now.
The point is that the reasons for the even standing of both candidates in the polls are understandable. The fact that both candidates have flaws is unfortunate, but not out of the ordinary.
I'm still hopeful that if McCain wins he will be more proactive in passing arms sales. He's only going to be around for one term and is quite stubborn - he's made it clear all the time that he's in favour of Taiwan and selling it arms.
Hopefully he would appoint some good advisors too.
In my view Obama is the unknown quantity, though I hope he'd be as good as McCain or better.
"It's incredible to me that after 8 years of damage and destruction to virtually every aspect of the United States, that anyone is voting Republican this year."
I'm surprised to hear this from you Michael. Couldn't the same could be said for the independent/KMT side regarding Taiwan's election. In their view, and how the media portrayed it, Chen, Shui-bian also did 8 years of D&D to Taiwan. And yet there were still 40% or so who voted DPP. Many voted for Ma, not because they really believed in him, but rather to not vote for the DPP candidate as they believed the DPP did a bad job in the previous 8 years. And intentional or not, Hsieh as DPP candidate was connected pretty well to the Chen, Shui-bian DPP administration. And in the U.S., Mc"Same" is being portrayed as the same old 8 years of Bush. Anyways, it's eerily fascinating to me how closely the U.S. candidates and election is mirroring the Taiwan candidates and elections (I'm sure you've seen the Ma/Obama comparison article in the past?).
As Thomas said, it shouldn't be a surprise. We all have our reasons for voting, and for the most part, we all think that we are voting for the most logical person. Different set of beliefs, standards, and view on how things work results in differing choices for each of us.
"Obama makes many people uneasy."
Gawd! and the choice of Sarah Palin doesn't...? Whew!
I second Thomas. I might vote for McCain as well
I am not a redneck; I grew up in Philadelphia and between me and my immediate family, we hold degrees from Stanford, Penn, Princeton, and Bryn Mawr. We are neither stupid nor ignorant (nor particularly religious). The truth is, we don't think of it as voting Republican, as decades of honorable behavior by Mr. McCain are a better indication of character than several months of the inevitable electoral pandering-a-thon (as if any candidate could ever be free of such a sin)
To think of McCain as a Bush extension defies emprical evidence and common sense.
McCain certainly isn't perfect, but he is no "McSame" either (remember when we used to have more clever political insults? sigh).
I don't even have anything against Obama. I think he is a fine man and could have the makings of a truly Great president in him. I just wish you'd have a bit more tact instead of implying anyone who would vote for John McCain is some sort of knuckle-dragging neanderthal.
Either way I am optimistic becuase both McCain and Obama will be better than W--and certainly better than Ma Ying-jeou
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that anyone voting for McCain is a knuckle dragging neandertal. It is simply a wonder to me that after eight years of catastrophic policy failure and widespread damage to the nation, virtually all of which is certain to continue under McCain, anyone would vote Republican. I know perfectly well why, it just continues to astound me.
Michael
(I'm sure you've seen the Ma/Obama comparison article in the past?).
It's a totally ridiculous comparison, on every level.
Michael
"virtually all of which is certain to continue under McCain"
But to me, and many very intelligent people I know, they don't agree with this. They feel that Obama genuinely would do more damage than good. Most Americans don't like Bush, but many don't equate Bush with some kind of "republican policy." Bush is very much a monster of his own creation.
I know you did not mean that those who would vote for McCain are neanderthals. I just feel that a lot of the bitterness of this campaign stems from the failure of people to truly be able to understand the motivations of others, which often have less to do with "correctness" than opinion.
In other news, I am dismayed to learn that the F-16 order will not be approved after all :(.
I just read an interesting study today. The Nesbitt study found that undergraduate males in the American south release higher levels of Cortisol when dealt an affront. The higher levels of cortisol make males more aggressive. The original hypothesis was that a southern code of honor was the culprit. Controlled testing revealed that it was a deep seated, internalized fear of violation and trespass led to more aggressive behavior and a strong reaction against the violator. Hence the strong degree to identify with single issues as make or break during elections (i.e. guns, religion). This helps explain why many in the American south can be politically motivated to act against their economic and social interests.
"This helps explain why many in the American south can be politically motivated to act against their economic and social interests."
Oh please! So Southerners are not stupid, just hormonally challenged? Give me a break.
Ahhh! The Cohen Nisbett study.
Post a Comment