world

Biden says U.S. would defend Taiwan against China

59 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2021 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

59 Comments
Login to comment

Damn straight! Sign me up again.

15 ( +24 / -9 )

"Yes," he responded when asked in a CNN town hall about defending Taiwan. "We have a commitment to that."

Wonderful! Someone who has the courage to do what's right.

More countries should commit to defending Taiwan.

23 ( +32 / -9 )

great, he said something that makes sense for once.

-3 ( +17 / -20 )

Japan would refuse permission to allow America ops from Japan bases.

-30 ( +9 / -39 )

Blacklabel

Going to war never makes sense. Didn't you learn your lessons in Afghanistan? Defeated by a terrorist group.

-20 ( +16 / -36 )

Going to war never makes sense.

if you were our leader in 1939, we’d all be speaking German or Japanese

23 ( +37 / -14 )

Taiwan also needs a sense of urgency. I read that their military is not well prepared. I hope they are willing to fight for themselves.

14 ( +18 / -4 )

Biden said the United States made a "sacred commitment" to defend NATO allies in Canada and Europe and it's the "same with Japan, same with South Korea, same with Taiwan."

The big difference is that Taiwan is not a UN member, putting it outside the scope of the collective self-defense exception in the UN charter. If the US attacks China without security council approval, it will be yet another illegal war.

-8 ( +9 / -17 )

The U.S.. under any administration, will most certainly defend Taiwan. So will UK, Australia, EU, etc. Japan maybe the last to openly admit it, but they will too.

14 ( +25 / -11 )

So as I said it is a good thing that Biden publicly stated that he would defend Taiwan from attack.

Was he supposed to say that? Im not so sure he was, but he did say it once previously.

Biden's statement was at odds with the long-held U.S. policy known as "strategic ambiguity," where Washington helps build Taiwan's defenses but does not explicitly promise to come to the island's help.

I am hoping he didnt misunderstand that the question was about going for ice cream afterwards.

"Yes. We have a commitment to do that. "

-7 ( +11 / -18 )

3 posts. All 3 directed at me, none about Biden or Taiwan.

neither Trump nor I are the topic here.

Actually, all three seeking to draw a truthfully favorable distinction between Biden and "Less than Cognitive Voldemort" AKA Trump.

5 ( +13 / -8 )

It's rare, but for once I actually agree with our conservative force here. This topic isn't really relevant to Trump, not much point bringing him into it.

That said, I am not sure how much I buy Biden's stance. Actions speak way louder than words, and his have been the opposite of what he has said for most of the presidency so far. If China did engage Taiwan, would the US actually engage? Despite Biden's words, I don't really believe they would.

On the other hand, I don't think China has any real intent on staging any actual military action against Taiwan. It is pretty safe to say "we will defend this territory from an attack that is never going to actually occur" for brownie points. If the stakes were different it would be a much more meaningful position.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

tooheysnew

Going to war never makes sense.

if you were our leader in 1939, we’d all be speaking German or Japanese

There is no comparison. Every country has the right to defend itself. The European war was a defense against the Nazis. Japan attacked America.

Taiwan is a small island and should be independent from mainland China. But America is not going to war over it.

America lost the war in Vietnam and Afghanistan, destroyed Iraq.

Wars should be avoided as much as they can.

-11 ( +11 / -22 )

Good for Taiwan .

Biden doesn't need approval by the way.

The USA will do as it wants

7 ( +16 / -9 )

China successfully fired a hypersonic missile.

https://www.reuters.com/world/china-surprises-us-with-hypersonic-missile-test-ft-reports-2021-10-17/

So far the American version has failed.

-18 ( +7 / -25 )

The question of a US military reaction in the event the Chinese government decides to make use of its military strength to reunify the island with the mainland has been the subject of intense policy debate for years. The US government has encouraged this debate, as its policy of “strategic ambivalence” was specifically formulated in order to prevent the need to make any promises that might need to be broken as well as to add an element of uncertainty to the Chinese leadership’s analysis of the situation.

However, it is abundantly clear that for all its posturing and strong words and saber-rattling, there is no chance that the US military will make any serious attempt to defend the independence of Taiwan island or to intervene in Chinese domestic affairs. There are seven reasons for this.

1. The USA will not risk the conclusive loss of its global status in a single throw.

Since 1989, the US has enjoyed its status as the singular global superpower. But in the aftermath of the astonishingly rapid defeat of Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi military, potential US opponents such as Iran, Russia, and China have intelligently pursued asymmetrical weapons development programs that now permit them to neutralize important aspects of the US military’s advantage. For example, the development of long-range, high-speed anti-ship missiles have eliminated the ability of US carrier groups to enter littoral zones or narrow sea lanes such as the Persian Gulf or the Taiwan Straits without risk.

Since the aircraft carrier replaced the battleship as the chief military symbol of a nation’s power in 1942, the US Navy carrier groups have been the material demonstration of US military dominance to the world. And while refusing to put her carriers at risk to defend Taiwan island would have a negative effect on the global perception of US power, the damage that restraint would do to perceived US status is infinitely less than permitting the world to see one or more USN carriers sent to the bottom of the South China Sea.

2. The American people will not support a war against China.

The American people are tired of the endless wars waged by their government over the last three decades. Despite the best efforts of the warmongering neocons, Americans flatly refused to support calls for invasions of Iran and Syria, and they have welcomed the long-overdue end of the war in Afghanistan. They now eagerly anticipate a final end to the war in Iraq. Unless the People’s Liberation Army were to invade the USA itself, the American people will not support a war against China.

3. The US military is not in any shape to fight a major regional power.

After the ignominious retreat from Afghanistan, the vaccine mandates that threaten to expel 30 percent of its best and most experienced soldiers, the politicization of the ranks above O-6, and the push to include more women, homosexuals, and transvestites, the US military is observably unready for war. At present, it is no more able to dispute the Taiwan Straits with China than it is to contest the Crimea with Russia or even defend its own border with Mexico.

4. Joe Biden is not a credible wartime leader.

Over one-third of Americans believe that the 2020 presidential election was fraudulently stolen from President Donald Trump. This also happens to be the segment of the American population that most strongly supports the U.S. military. And these Americans will not support any military action taken by a man they believe to be an illegitimate and unelected Commander-in-Chief.

5. The USA has nothing to gain and much to potentially lose from a conflict over Taiwan.

What would the American people gain from a successful defense of Taiwan by the U.S. military. Absolutely nothing. At most, the status quo would be maintained, which would provide no actual benefit to any American. But an unsuccessful defense would be severely damaging to world respect for the USA, and a complete military catastrophe would be the first step toward the collapse of the United States as a political entity. To put it in historical terms, any attempt to interfere in the unification of China would run a real risk of becoming the American equivalent of the Athenian Sicilian Expedition.

6. The US government cannot afford a war against its second-largest creditor.

Between the massive public and private debt, the economic lockdowns, the growing number of workers killed and incapacitated by the vaccines, and the huge number of workers being disemployed by the vaccine mandates, the US economy is a shambles. The US government already owes China more than $1 trillion. China obviously will not finance a US war against China, but neither will the US’s leading creditor, Japan.

7. Xi Jinping knows Taiwan.

President Xi knows both Taiwan and the Taiwan people very well. He served as provincial governor for Fujian and Zhejiang, and his success in attracting Taiwan investment into both coastal provinces is considered one of his significant accomplishments. Xi’s objective is unification, by any means necessary, but it is clear that he would prefer the unification to be a peaceful one. And as a leader who has successfully convinced Taiwan capital to join with the mainland in the past, he is very well-positioned to convince the Taiwan people it is in their long-term interest to unify with the mainland rather than resist it.

Ironically, it is the change in the balance of military power in China’s favor that makes a future war in the Taiwan Straits less likely. There are many factors that the Chinese leadership must take into account concerning the ultimate resolution of the unification of Taiwan with the mainland. But a military response by the United States to Chinese action is not one of them.

-19 ( +8 / -27 )

Ego,

Those are certainly salient points but I respectfully disagree on a few of them.

I think that there is no way that the U.S. is going to allow a budding democracy, especially one that sits aside a major shipping route to fall to a communist dictatorship.

The United States would have a lot of support around the world. The Chinese would like to make this a bi-lateral conflict, at least in terms of political and diplomatic support. I do not believe that to be the case.

Your points on fast missiles are certainly valid and I have been worried about them for some time. However, the Chinese military has yet to demonstrate the complex kill chain necessary to effectively employ them (although that seems cold comfort to me).

Finally, we seem to see our potential adversaries as a unified whole with no weaknesses of their own while focusing (perhaps excessively, but I would rather over-focus than under-focus) on our acknowledged weaknesses. As General Petraus said "The Enemy gets a vote." I would say that the corollary of that is true as well. We get a vote and the Chinese know it.

I also think that there is no way to judge a president in war-time until he (someday she) is in the middle of a war.

12 ( +16 / -4 )

The White House subsequently told reporters that U.S. policy on Taiwan "has not changed."

Back to strategic ambiguity. It's what Zichi said, the US is not going to go to war over Taiwan.

The Chinese would like to make this a bi-lateral conflict, at least in terms of political and diplomatic support. I do not believe that to be the case.

The Vietnam War was not just a war between the US and North Vietnam. It also involved the allies of both countries. The same will be with China and Taiwan. That China and Russia sailed ten naval vessels through the Tsugaru Straight shows that it will not be a bi-lateral conflict despite CPC claims of Taiwan as an internal issue. Russia will be involved as will Australia, the UK, and others. The message sent to Japan is that if there is war, all US bases in Japan are fair game.

If you're Japan, you would not want to be involved and give China the chance to fight a war on your islands. The potential for retribution for the past cannot be denied.

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

USA should call Taiwan a country and join the diplomatic powerhourse of ... checks notes ... Lithuania in defying China

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

I'm sure China is absolutely terrified.

-6 ( +10 / -16 )

Japan maybe the last to openly admit it, but they will too.

@ossan

No thank you. We want nothing to do with any war involving America and our neighbours.

I know you're obsessed with China, but try to understand that, please.

-1 ( +10 / -11 )

Well the United States of Taiwan may soon come to fruition.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

If China does attack and invade Taiwan, wouldn’t most of the free world stop trading with China?

10 ( +14 / -4 )

My Daddy always said, put those damn bases back on Taiwan.

5 ( +13 / -8 )

@OssanAmerica

The U.S.. under any administration, will most certainly defend Taiwan. So will UK, Australia, EU, etc. Japan maybe the last to openly admit it, but they will too

Australia - well, may be several ships. Nuclear subs wll not be available at least for the next ten years.

UK? It does not have a constant military presence in the region, just 2 small patrol ships somewhere in the Pacific. It will take several months at least to equip and send here something significant like a carrier strike group (if the ships are ready and not under repairs etc). If the Chinese start something I don't think they'll give proper warning and time to its adversaries to prepare and deploy.

EU? That was really fun. Bush and Co had to twist Europeans' arms to make them go to Iraq and Afghanistan, from where they ran as fast as they could. A war against China?? Yeah, they'll be happy to take part. Particularly the French will be very happy to do it, after the Australian subs affair.

Japan? How it is possible with the present constitution?

-10 ( +7 / -17 )

Going to war never makes sense.

I think it's more accurate to say that there are no winners in any war, and so should be avoided. In this case, it's the people of Taiwan who will suffer most whether other countries step in or not. I really hope our leaders are looking at serious alternatives to war, and that their goals will be for the benefit of Taiwan and not simply an anti-CCP drive.

6 ( +10 / -4 )

Thank you, President Biden. So much for all those claiming the US would not defend Taiwan.

The free world has your back, Taiwan. Let this be a warning to Communist China - the world is NOT going to sit by if you even lift a finger against Taiwan. You will be reduced back to the stone age.

6 ( +16 / -10 )

This is carefully worded....

The U.S. government has demonstrated, through actual actions, their rock solid support for Taiwan," Presidential Office spokesperson Xavier Chang said in a statement

Well wait s minute.......

At a CNN town hall, Biden was asked whether the U.S. would come to Taiwan's defense if China invaded. "Yes," he responded. "We have a commitment to that."

Biden's statement was at odds with the long-held U.S. policy known as "strategic ambiguity," where Washington helps build Taiwan's defenses but does not explicitly promise to come to the island's help.

Also "The U.S. defense relationship with Taiwan is guided by the Taiwan Relations Act. We will uphold our commitment under the Act, we will continue to support Taiwan's self-defense, and we will continue to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo,"

That in no way suggests the US government will.

-11 ( +2 / -13 )

The Japanese government could indeed step back.

Way up the political circumstances. zichi raises a valid point, may I add that the Japanese people are dependent on the interpretation of a ambiguous below

Japan-U.S. Security Treaty

https://www.mofa.go.jp/region/n-america/us/q&a/ref/1.html

There is no bottom line, no guarantees.

The pact, not a treaty is open to US interpretation. It flipping is.

A political walkway is built in.

You see the reality is Japan is first and foremost a forward base.

A Japans tax payers pay for the privilege.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

I suggest there is a high probability that this current US administration would fold if Xi Jinping throws the dice and sets his agenda in place, and militarily seize Twain.

This means hard and fast response. Both military and political globally.

That mean full isolation. Seizure of all Government of China assets globally.

Lay it out and stick to a hard and brutal agenda.

And yes go to war, or else what do we all stand for?

A bully who view the free world as weak and decrepit?

Cowering in a corner?

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

@Ego Sum Lux Mundi 1-7 Totally incorrect you can not speak for Americans, you mentioned Americans are tired of wars. Ask yourself when has China been in a major conflict war? China doesn't want to start a war that it can not finish, don't under estimate the American people, maybe the government but not the PEOPLE!!

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

The fact that an American general had to reassure China that the fat guy would not attack them tells me that China and US will not go to war, despite all this fearmongering, especially from US' 51st state, Australia. I agree with that sole poster who said China isn't really going to attack Taiwan - just show. They're not that stupid. Even most Taiwanese would just prefer the status quo. Polls have shown that those Taiwanese who want full independence are in the minority, despite what westerners want for Taiwanese. And a lot of the actions and words from China are in response to the incessant anti-China rhetoric in much of the western press. Has anyone seen the BBC report on the Uighurs - the video clips were taken from a previous Chinese documentary, but with the narrative totally changed, and original voices dubbed over. Shameful.

Just recently, there was an article in that oh-so-wonderful Daily Express saying that the UK had a ten-year plan to make itself into a global power to rival US and China. Gimme a friggin' break!!! UK should just sticking to reminiscing about its victory over Argentina. It's lost its empire and everything else.

Let's get one thing straight. This anti-China rhetoric has come about because USA doesn't want to lose its monopoly on global power.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Plus, US is going to make a lot of money from war, even if they are all failed wars. And it also benefits from a breakdown in Australia-China trading.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

The USA. A paper tiger.

Joe Biden just ended a 20 year war - defeated by a peasant army using donkeys and pick-up trucks.

China is not going to invade Taiwan. Foxconn, which manufactures and assembles Apple products in China is just one example of how the two countries are intertwined. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by China invading Taiwan.

Taiwan was ruled by Japan from 1895 to 1945.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

I'm sure Zing-Ping is shaking in his silk slippers now...

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

But what would he do if China decided to impose 'sanctions' on Taiwan.

Seize their assets, punish any company that did business with them, ban any ship that docked there from docking in the rest of China for a year...

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

But then Japan refuses to let the US defend Taiwan from Okinawan bases, the war is over quickly since the force that the US can deploy from Guam and carriers are very limited.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

He cannot act without Congress, this why I disagree

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The only way USA could defend Taiwan if China decided to take it by force would be through the use of nukes. The Chinese counter attack would destroy USA.

China is 5000 years of history. Invented steel, compass, gunpowder, paper and many more of the most fundamental inventions and disciplines in all human history. The loss of that civilization would be a catastrophe for everyone. USA in 400 years of history committed genocide against the native people, turned Africa into a warren for the hunting black skins, something which USA cops have borrowed from the salvers. Used nukes on densely populated urban areas in order to test a new WMD. Would the end of USA or Anglo-American civilization be such a bad thing?

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

The US made that promise already a long time ago and they stood to it until Mr. Nixon visited Peking and turned its back on Taiwan.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Biden says U.S. would defend Taiwan against China

There is no way China will attack now. I just don't see it.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

It's not a question of whether the US would defend Taiwan or not. Let's not kid ourselves here. The US could destroy China in a day if they were provoked enough. China isn't as strong as it thinks. The thing is all the fallout and repercussions that would ensue.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Let's hope so, I pray that he can stick to at least THAT promise.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

bass4funk:

Let's hope so, I pray that he can stick to at least THAT promise.

I will say this - Trump didn't start a war in his 4-year term. Quite an achievement compared to recent presidents. Don't you think? He was even on friendly terms with Xi until spring 2020.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

It looks like this century is becoming a big competition between U.S. and China. I wish I could live long to see the result of the game.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Let's hope so, I pray that he can stick to at least THAT promise.

The modern history of the Democrat party says he will not. Just look at what happened with Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. As soon as the going gets tough, the will push to give up when they themselves will key to voting in favor of the conflicts to begin with. China knows all they have to do is bloody America’s nose and the Dems will surrender as-soon-as they are able to. They haven’t cared about democracy since JFK.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

But then Japan refuses to let the US defend Taiwan from Okinawan bases, the war is over quickly since the force that the US can deploy from Guam and carriers are very limited.

Who says the US would not use bases in Okinawa to defend Taiwan? Where is it written? And why do you assume Japan would not be part of the response? Japan knows that if China takes Taiwan, Okinawa is next.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

The Chinese will take biden’s misstatement as an aggressive act thus raising the chances for misunderstanding and war.

Quite the opposite. If there is any ambiguity about US intentions to defend Taiwan then China might misconstrue and attack thinking mistakenly the US was not interested in defending her. Openly stating the US would defend Taiwan deters an attack.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The modern history of the Democrat party says he will not. Just look at what happened with Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. As soon as the going gets tough, the will push to give up when they themselves will key to voting in favor of the conflicts to begin with. China knows all they have to do is bloody America’s nose and the Dems will surrender as-soon-as they are able to. They haven’t cared about democracy since JFK.

The distinction you miss is those wars were defending corrupt authoritarian states and the wars themselves were unwinnable because their people didn't support their government. In the case of Iraq the US never had any right to invade and it is clear now that invasion caused far more problems than it solved. It greatly empowered Iran and that first Sunni despot who served as Iraq's post Saddam President created the conditions for Daesh to be formed.

It was a Democratic President who fought the Korean War and a Republican who accepted the current stalemate there, preferring to walk away than finish the job. We still pay for that terrible decision. It was a Republican President who negotiated the US withdrawal from Vietnam but resigned, leaving it to Gerald Ford to complete. And it was a Republican President who sealed the deal to withdraw from Afghanistan and release 5000 terrorist prisoners without so much as even consulting the NATO allies or the government of Afghanistan then left his predecessor to deal with the aftermath of his agreement, including an Afghan government and military that were so demoralized by having their knees cut off they felt they had no option left but run. And I bet if Mr. Biden had torn up that agreement and kept US and NATO forces there you would be busy here criticizing that for the US not honoring it agreements and use this as "proof" that Mr. Biden is a "war monger".

1 ( +4 / -3 )

It looks like this century is becoming a big competition between U.S. and China. I wish I could live long to see the result of the game.

I'm 63 and expect to see the denouement before I leave this world. Xi Jinping, Baby Ping Ping, is burning the candle from both ends and it won't end well for him. If he's lucky he'll end up like the Gang of Four, tried in a "Peoples Court" and imprisoned. He is widely hated within the CCP, with many members living in fear for their live, and the lives of their families. A faction within the PLA tried to depose him in late 2017 but were unsuccessful. It could happen again though. He is widely seen as driving China's friends away leaving China isolated. Suppressing the likes of Jack Ma has alienated anyone with any interest in becoming wealthy by starting an innovative business. Now they are told to look to those bastions of efficiency and innovation, the mighty State Owned Industries for direction. Their best will leave instead. But instead of backing off Baby Ping Ping just doubles down on repression. It probably will not end well for him.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Unsurprisingly, the White House later backtracked on Joe’s comment:

“The U.S. defence relationship with Taiwan is guided by the Taiwan Relations Act. We will uphold our commitment under the act, we will continue to support Taiwan’s self-defence, and we will continue to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo,” the spokesperson said.

So there is no commitment to defend Taiwan.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Unsurprisingly, the White House later backtracked on Joe’s comment:

“The U.S. defence relationship with Taiwan is guided by the Taiwan Relations Act. We will uphold our commitment under the act, we will continue to support Taiwan’s self-defence, and we will continue to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo,” the spokesperson said.

So there is no commitment to defend Taiwan

There is. The US isn't supposed to be explicit about it and this President made the mistake of stating the obvious instead of being ambiguous. I can say that the whole time I was in the Navy there was never any doubt that the US would defend Taiwan if China ever tried to take it. The how-to changes over time as their military evolves but not the determination. Pretty much everything the military does now is aimed at defeating China if it ever comes to that. Ten years ago you couldn't call them an adversary. Big business would shout you down if you did, but ten years ago a lot of the new stuff you see coming on line now was well into its development. Preparing for a possible showdown with China has been going on for a long time now even as resources were being sucked up by land wars in west Asia and GWOT.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

-the world knows we have the most powerful military in the history of the world.

Having surrendered to the guys with the donkeys in Afghanistan, I guess the US have now slipped to second and the Taliban gone straight in at number one.

Taiwan is 100 miles from the Chinese coast and over 6000 miles from the West Coast of the US. That's going to be an interesting campaign.

The US cheerfully nuked cities full of Asian civilians in the past. Would they do that again in China?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@Desert Tortoise

Who says the US would not use bases in Okinawa to defend Taiwan?

Japan says so.

And why do you assume Japan would not be part of the response?

Because Beijing threatens to declare Japan an enemy combatant and bombard Tokyo with thousands of ballistic missiles if Tokyo allowed the US to launch military intervention from Okinawa.

It is in Japan's best interest to let Taiwan fall quickly while Japan looks the other way. It's the cruelest thing to say, but in the best interest of Japan's national security.

Japan knows that if China takes Taiwan, Okinawa is next.

Not Okinawa, but the Diaoyu Islands. But *Diaoyu Islands were never Japanese to begin with***, the Japanese obligation to return them to the Republic of China per the terms of surrender** was never honored by Japan.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Not Okinawa, but the Diaoyu Islands. But *Diaoyu Islands were never Japanese to begin with***, the Japanese obligation to return them to the Republic of China per the terms of surrender** was never honored by Japan.

That was back before the CCP took over. The UK honored an agreement with the government of China over Hong Kong (before the CCP) , and the CCP didn't honor that agreement in the end once it was turned over to their goverment. Any "agreement" before the CCP took power will probably be ignored because the majority of the world wants to tell the CCP to go suck air.

Taiwan never ever belonged to the CCP. But CCP claims it is "to unite China", but it is only an excuse for the CCP to take over the only opposition party left (the ROC)... and claim full oppressive control over "all" Chinese and "China".

The CCP should not be allowed any further attempts of expansion. They need to be put back in place according to actual internationally accepted borders. Not claiming all the south China sea. Not building an artificial island in international and claiming it's "China". The CCP has gotten arrogant, greedy, and aggressive.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@HonestDictator

That was back before the CCP took over. 

The Republic of China still exists today, aka Taiwan. Just return the Diaoyu Islands to Republic of China and problem solved, Japan then honored its surrender obligations. No more territorial disputes with China.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Openly stating the US would defend Taiwan deters an attack.

Would that be before his Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff calls up a Chinese general to warn him of the US military plans or after?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Biden doesn't need or want permission from Japan or any other nation to defend Taiwan if the USA chooses to do so.

The USA will do what it wants

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is in Japan's best interest to let Taiwan fall quickly while Japan looks the other way. It's the cruelest thing to say, but in the best interest of Japan's national security.

@Samit Basu.

Japanese population has been ingrained by years of imperial propaganda on their own fable of greatness. Losing Taiwan means that China will hold an important chokehold over the Japanese economy through the control of maritime trade through Taiwan straight. There are other routes but they will cost more than ever, and this will double economic hardship for Japan.

The cruelest thing to say is for Japan to accept that their days as a world power is long over. They need to adapt and learn like the UK has moved on and actually shreds less xenophobia to accept immigrants. The Brexit was a setback but it wasn't too significant.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites