Executive Summary: America's Stake in Taiwan

Taiwan is one of democratic Asia's most important nations: It has a bigger population than Australia, a larger GDP than Indonesia, and an advanced technology base second only to Japan's. Taiwan is America's eighth largest trading partner and sixth largest agricultural customer. For over a half century, Taiwan has been one of America's important defense and intelligence partners, first as a bulwark against the Sino-Soviet alliance and now as a partner monitoring China's expanding strategic presence in the Pacific.

But this partnership is in peril as Taiwanese politicians and voters sense--rightly or wrongly--that America's commitment to their democracy is wavering. In a vicious circle, an uncertain U.S. commitment undermines Taiwan's consensus on its own defense, which in turn annoys U.S. leaders and policymakers.

Washington must now contemplate how its position in Asia would change if Taiwan were to slip into China's sphere. If Washington intends to maintain America's historic strategy of keeping "Island Asia" out of the hands of "Mainland Asia," it must reassess its policies toward Taiwan and adopt a set of policies that enhances U.S. interests.

Taiwan: Part of China? The central policy question for Washington is whether to accept that Taiwan is "part of China" as Beijing insists or to maintain--as President Ronald Reagan did in 1982--that the people of Taiwan will decide their future relationship with China. The U.S. position since the end of World War II has been that "as Taiwan...[is] not covered by any existing international disposition, sovereignty over the area is an unsettled question." In 1982, President Reagan reaffirmed this position, and all subsequent U.S. Administrations have affirmed this stance. Yet in recent years, official Washington has averted its gaze whenever Beijing declared its right to retake Taiwan by force.

Taiwan's Strategic Value. Taiwan is a key (albeit unofficial) American defense and intelligence partner in the Pacific astride vital sea lanes. Taiwan's military has been America's second best cash customer (after Saudi Arabia) for defense equipment and services nearly every year for the past 15 years. However, the Pentagon must also face the reality that limiting Taiwan to a purely defensive posture vis-à-vis China is horrifically--and needlessly-- expensive. An effective strategy requires that Taiwan have the deterrent offensive capacity to inflict serious pain on Chinese military targets.

Would it matter if, through benign neglect or otherwise, Washington acquiesced to Taiwan's absorption by China? China threatens war if Taiwan does not submit, but would Beijing settle for Taiwan? If Beijing's threats of war were successful in breaking Washington's commitments in the Taiwan Strait, what would prevent China from declaring at some point that Japan's continued occupation of the Senkaku Islands means war?

Until Asia's democracies can rest assured that Beijing does not seek military preeminence in the region, U.S. strategists should resume their historic objective of keeping "Island Asia" out of the hands of "Mainland Asia."

Is Taiwan a threat to peace? Given China's myriad territorial claims on India, Japan, South Korea, and its other neighbors, one must ask whether China's war threats would end with Taiwan. Moreover, given China's reliance on international manufacturing supply chains, war is clearly no more in China's interests than it is in America's interests. Colin Powell observed that "whether China chooses peace or coercion to resolve its differences with Taiwan will tell us a great deal about the kind of relationship China seeks not only with its neighbors, but with us." In this sense, Taiwan is a touchstone of America's commitment to democracy in Asia.

Taiwan Defense Cooperation with China? In 2005, a top Taiwan politician and Chinese leader Hu Jintao issued a joint communiqué declaring that "military conflicts shall be effectively avoided so long as there is no possibility that Taiwan moves toward 'Taiwan independence.'" Today, some Taiwan politicians call for a peace agreement with China whereby Taiwan would agree that it is part of an undefined "one China," and they suggest that the U.S. wants this as well. Still others hold that Taiwan does not need to defend itself from China.

With Taiwan's defenses becoming obsolete while China's military modernization accelerates, Taiwan's military can no longer rely on its technological edge to defeat a Chinese attack. Taiwan's 2007 defense budget faces a mid-January deadline for passage in the opposition-dominated legislature and still faces the prospect of major program cuts. Nonetheless, Taiwan politicians who advocate a defense accommodation with China certainly must see that it would supplant any security relationship with the United States or other Asian democracies.

What the United States Should Do. If the "global expansion of democracy" is indeed a pillar of American foreign policy in Asia, the U.S. should:

Counter Beijing's relentless campaign to isolate Taiwan by strengthening U.S.-Taiwan trade ties with a U.S.-Taiwan free trade agreement and by encouraging other democracies to include Taiwan in international health, transport, nonproliferation, counterterrorist, and humanitarian relief efforts.

Lend moral support to Taiwan's democracy. Admit publicly that America has a stake in the survival of Taiwan as a democracy regardless of China's territorial claims.

Bolster Taiwan's offensive military capacities. The Pentagon should admit that Taiwan's strategy, based purely on defensive systems, is expensive and lacks the deterrence of a second-strike, counterforce capability.

Conclusion. America's strategic position in Asia is approaching a tipping point vis-à-vis China. Some believe that America's only interest in Taiwan is to ensure peaceful resolution of the Taiwan issue--a policy in which process trumps outcome. In 1945, President Harry Truman declared a "strong, united and democratic China" to be one of "the most vital interests of the United States." Two out of three is not good enough. Until China is democratic, the most vital U.S. interest must be to maintain America's strategic posture in the Western Pacific, and Taiwan is essential to that strategy.

--John J. Tkacik, Jr., is Senior Research Fellow in China, Taiwan, and Mongolia Policy in the Asian Studies Center at The Heritage Foundation.

[5]The U.S. Department of State reacted to China's Anti-Secession Law of March 14, 2005, as follows: "The decision by the Chinese leaders to have the National People's Congress adopt an anti-secession law today is--it's unfortunate. It really does not serve the cause of peace and stability on the Taiwan Strait and for that reason we believe it to be unhelpful. As we noted before, it runs counter to the relatively positive, the recent warming trends that we've seen in cross-strait relations." U.S. Department of State, daily press briefing, March 14, 2005, at www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2005/43404.htm (January 4, 2007). On May 17, 2004, China vowed to "crush" any attempt by Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian to pursue a policy that Beijing considers a move toward independence; the U.S. State Department spokesman said the statement was "unhelpful" but then emphasized the "constructive" portions of the statement and said that "we would urge Beijing to focus on those positive elements that talk about how the two sides can move relations forward." U.S. Department of State, daily press briefing, audio recording, at www.state.gov/documents/organization/32649.asx (January 4, 2007).

[6]See also Flora Wang, "Pan-Greens Blast Ma over Proposed Pact with China," Taipei Times, October 25, 2006, p. 3, at www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2006/10/25/2003333277 (January 4, 2007).

[7]See U.S. Census Bureau, "U.S. Trade in Advanced Technology Products--Information & Communications," November 9, 2006, at www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/product/atp/2006/09/atpctry/atpg04.html (January 4, 2007).

[8]See Michael S. Chase, Kevin L. Pollpeter, and James C. Mulvenon, Shanghaied? The Economic and Political Implications of the Flow of Information Technology and Investment Across the Taiwan Strait, RAND Corporation Technical Report No. 133, July 2004, p. 64, at www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/2005/RAND_TR133.pdf (January 4, 2007). This seems to be the accepted wisdom today. However, the figure may be based on statistics gathered in 2000 by Taiwan's Market Intelligence Center under the nonprofit Institute for Information Industry. In 2000, Taiwan firms accounted for 73 percent of China's entire output of information technology products. See China Economic News Service (Taipei), "Mainland China to Replace Taiwan as World's 3rd Largest IT Supplier," November 6, 2000, and "IT Hardware Production Gap Widens Across Taiwan Strait," June 5, 2002.

[9]Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, "OECD Finds That China Is Biggest Exporter of Information Technology Goods in 2004, Surpassing US and EU," December 12, 2005, at www.oecd.org/document/8/ 0,2340,en_2825_495656_35833096_1_1_1_1,00.html (January 4, 2007).

[10]Defense Science Board Task Force, High Performance Microchip Supply, U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, February 2005, p. 30, at www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/ 2005-02-HPMS_Report_Final.pdf (January 4, 2007).

[11]For a full discussion of this danger, see ibid., pp. 29-31.

[12]Several sources discuss this problem. See Harry Harding, "Chinese Checks," The Wall Street Journal, October 24, 2006, p. A18; Evelyn Iritani, "Trade Petition Targets China's Auto Market; The U.S., Europe and Canada File a Complaint over Beijing's Import Duties on Car Parts," The Los Angeles Times, September 16, 2006, at www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-china16sep16,1,5191056.story (January 4, 2007); and Karan K. Bhatia, Deputy U.S. Trade Representative, in U.S. Department of State, Bureau of International Information Programs, "China Urged to Assume Greater Role in Global Trade," January 25, 2006, at usinfo.state.gov/usinfo/Archive/2006/Jan/25-274934.html (January 4, 2007).

[13]Defense Science Board Task Force, High Performance Microchip Supply, pp. 5-15.

[14]"More than half a million Taiwanese businessmen and their families are estimated to live and work on the mainland." See Embassy of the People's Republic of China in India, "Mainland, Taiwan Agree to Renew Flights," November 20, 2005, at www.chinaembassy.org.in/eng/zgbd/t222241.htm (January 4, 2007). See also Ing-wen Tsai, Ph.D., "A New Era in Cross-Strait Relations? Taiwan and China in the WTO," Heritage Foundation Lecture No. 726, January 14, 2002, at www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/upload/3781_1.pdf.

[15]"Press Conference, Stephen M. Young, Director, American Institute in Taiwan, American Cultural Center, Taipei, October 26, 2006," at www.ait.org.tw/en/news/officialtext/viewer.aspx?id=2006102702 (January 9, 2007).

[16]"The third pillar of security is our commitment to the global expansion of democracy." See George W. Bush, "President Bush Discusses Iraq Policy at Whitehall Palace in London," Office of the White House Press Secretary, November 19, 2003, at www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/11/20031119-1.html (January 4, 2007).

[17]A November 2006 opinion survey showed that 62 percent of Taiwan's people support formal Taiwan independence and 54 percent would support it "even if Beijing does not allow" it. Only 16 percent opposed independence. See news release, "Taiwan Xianggang, Aomen, Chongji minzhong wenhua yu guojia rentong guoji bijiao diaocha' 2006" (An international comparison survey of Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau, Ryukyu people, and their cultural and national identities, 2006), National Taiwan Chengchi University, Election Research Center November 27, 2006, at www.esc.nccu.edu.tw/newchinese/news/2006newletter.pdf (January 4, 2007). For an English-language summary of the report, see Central News Agency (Taiwan), "Latest Poll Shows More People Support Independence," November 30, 2006, at www.cna.com.tw/eng/cepread.php?id=200611300011&pt=10&LArr=200611300007 (January 4, 2007).

[18]See Colin L. Powell, "Remarks at Asia Society Annual Dinner," New York, June 10, 2002, at www.state.gov/secretary/former/ powell/remarks/2002/10983.htm (January 4, 2007).

[19]Sunzi Bingfa, III.2.

[20]Robert Zoellick, in hearing, A Resurgent China: Responsible Stakeholder or Robust Rival? Committee on International Relations, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Cong., 2nd Sess., May 10, 2006, p. 44, at www.internationalrelations.house.gov/109/27477.pdf (January 4, 2007).

[21]Chinese military leaders first adopted this phrase when the election of pro-independence presidential candidate Chen Shui-bian seemed possible in March 2000. See "Zhang Wannian: Taidu Yiweizhe Zhanheng; Fenlie meiyou heping; Baiwan Xiongshi Yanzhen Yidai" (Zhang Wannian: Taiwan independence means war; no peace in separation; a million brave troops await the order), Hong Kong Commercial Daily, March 6, 2000, at www.pdf.sznews.com/hkcd/2000/0306/newsfile/n1-2.htm (January 4, 2007).

[22]For a short review of war-avoidance theory, see Steven Geoffrey Gieseler, "Debate on the 'Democratic Peace,'" American Diplomacy, March 2004, at www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/archives_roll/2004_01-03/gieseler_debate/gieseler_debate.html (January 4, 2007).

[23]Stephen Richards Graubard, Kissinger: Portrait of a Mind (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1973), p. 17, citing Henry A. Kissinger, A World Restored: Metternich, Castlereagh and the Problems of Peace, 1812-1822 (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1957).

[24]Surya Gangadharan, "Arunachal Is Chinese Land: Envoy," CNN-IBN (India), November 13, 2006, at www.ibnlive.com/news/arunachal-is-chinese-territory-envoy-minces-no-words/26108-3.html (January 4, 2007).

[25]Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee simply responded that "Arunachal Pradesh is an integral part of India" and suggested that China ought not to be "negotiating through the media." See Ashok Sharma, "India Rejects China's Claim to Region," Associated Press, November 14, 2006.

[26]The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 reads: "It is the policy of the United States to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people of Taiwan." It also directs that "the President and the Congress shall determine, in accordance with constitutional processes, appropriate action by the United States in response to any such danger." Public Law 96-8, § 2(b)(6) and § 3(c). See also 22 U.S. Code § 3301.

[27]Article II of the Mutual Defense Treaty says that "the Parties separately and jointly...will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack and communist subversive activity directed from without against their territorial integrity and political stability." Article V states that each party will "act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional processes." Mutual Defense Treaty Between the United States of American and the Republic of China, December 2, 1959.

[28]Brian Hsu, "Military Needs Better Data on Maritime Conditions," Taipei Times, February 18, 2003, p. 4, at www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2003/02/18/195006 (January 4, 2007).

[29]Lyu Zhaolong, "Zhonggong dan [sic, probably "zhan"] Jian chuangyue 'Diyi Daolian' Yi zai Shitan" (PRC Warship penetrates 'First Island Chain' in exploratory move), China Times, October 31, 2002; Brian Hsu, "Chinese Spy Ship in Taiwan Waters," Taipei Times, November 4, 2002, p. 1, at www.taipeitimes.com/news/2002/11/04/story/0000178256 (January 4, 2007).

[30]Wu Chongtao, "Zhanshi Guofang Zazhi: Tai Mei Hezuo dui Zhonggong jinzing Dianzi Qingsou" (Jane's Defense Magazine: Taiwan, US carry out electronic intelligence collection against the PRC), China Times, January 29, 2001. See also Brian Hsu, "Taiwan and US Jointly Spying on China: Report," Taipei Times, January 30, 2001, p. 3, at www.taipeitimes.com/news/2001/ 01/30/story/0000071597 (January 4, 2007).

[31]"Once linked to the US satellite system codenamed 'Defense Support Project' (DSP), Taiwan would be able to allow up to seven more minutes in advance while its Patriot anti-missile weaponry prepared to intercept any incoming missiles.... Taiwan military plans to set up ground stations over the next five years to plug the island's Patriot systems to the US military satellite system." Agence France-Presse, "US to Share Early-Warning Missile Data with Taiwan," Taipei Times, October 8, 2002, p. 3, at www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2002/10/08/171149 (January 4, 2007).

[32]Zhang Lifang, "Yujing Leida Shenru Dalu Sanqian li" (Early warning radar can see 3,000 km into mainland), Central Daily News (Taipei), April 19, 2000. See also Wang Jionghua, "Changcheng Yujing Leida Suoxiaoxing kezaoqi Zhenze Daodan" (Long-range radar attenuation can give early detection of guided missiles), Central Daily News, April 19, 2000; "PAVE PAWS Zaoqi Yijing Leida, Mei Kongjun fandaodan Yujing Hexin Zhuangbei" (PAVE PAWS early-warning radar, core equipment to U.S. anti-missile warning), China Times, April 19, 2000; and Lyu Zhaolong, "Huamei Junshou Huiyi Benzhou Dengchang" (US-Taiwan arms sales meeting held here this week), China Times, June 7, 2000.

[33]The latest figures published by the Pentagon are for 2004. See U.S. Department of Defense, Security Assistance Agency, Facts Book, September 2004, at www.dsca.mil/programs/biz-ops/2004_facts/facts%20book%202004.pdf (January 4, 2007).

[34]Ibid.

[35]Private conversations with U.S. officials. See also Sofia Wu, "Plan to Lease AV8b Fighters Never Got off the Ground: ROC Air Force," Central News Agency, March 11, 2002.

[36]Taiwan's Ministry of National Defense is seeking F-16C/Ds as the gap filler.

[37]These price figures are based on interviews with Administration officials.

[38]Wu Mingjie, "Xiongfeng Sanxing feidan Shengji, Liangnian nei fuyi" (Hsiung Feng 3 missile progresses, to be deployed in two years), China Times, September 1, 2002. Perhaps two years was optimistic. See Lu Zhaolong, "Tuixiu zhuanjia huiguo, 'Xiongsan' yi fei chong tian" (Retired expert brought back, Hsiung Feng 3 finally flies successfully), China Times, January 7, 2005, p. A2, and Lu Zhaolong, "Xiongfeng Xunyi Feidan, jijiang liangchang" (Hsiung Feng cruise missile to enter serial production), China Times, July 20, 2005. There is evidence that the Hsiung Feng 3 is indeed ready for serial production but that pressure from the United States is preventing it. See DPA, "CSIST 'Successful' in Firing Supersonic Anti-Ship Missile," TaipeiTimes, January 8, 2005, p. 3, at www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2005/01/08/2003218507 (January 4, 2007), and "Defense Ministry Rejects Missile Deployment Story," Taipei Times, August 13, 2005, p. 3, at www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/ archives/2005/08/13/2003267544 (January 4, 2007).

[39]"Broad Support for Lien's Long-Range Missile Policy," Taiwan Weekly Business Bulletin, December 15, 1999, p. 9.

[40]General Douglas MacArthur, "Farewell Address to Congress," April 19, 1951, at www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/douglasmacarthurfarewelladdress.htm (January 4, 2007).

[41]"Under such conditions, the Pacific no longer represents menacing avenues of approach for a prospective invader. It assumes, instead, the friendly aspect of a peaceful lake. Our line of defense is a natural one and can be maintained with a minimum of military effort and expense. It envisions no attack against anyone, nor does it provide the bastions essential for offensive operations, but properly maintained, would be an invincible defense against aggression. The holding of this littoral defense line in the western Pacific is entirely dependent upon holding all segments thereof; for any major breach of that line by an unfriendly power would render vulnerable to determined attack every other major segment. This is a military estimate as to which I have yet to find a military leader who will take exception. For that reason, I have strongly recommended in the past, as a matter of military urgency, that under no circumstances must Formosa fall under Communist control. Such an eventuality would at once threaten the freedom of the Philippines and the loss of Japan and might well force our western frontier back to the coast of California, Oregon and Washington." MacArthur, "Farewell Address to Congress."

[42]In the year ending August 15, 2002, a total of 259,086 civilian aircraft transited the Taiwan Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) while 246,015 commercial ships transited the Taiwan Strait and the East Taiwan maritime route. Taiwan Ministry of National Defense, briefing for members of the Trilateral Dialogue Conference, PowerPoint presentation, August 26, 2002, p. 7.

[43]Ibid. Totals do not include fishing vessels or domestic Taiwanese aircraft.

[44]"Unsinkable carrier tender" was MacArthur's sobriquet for Taiwan prior to the Korean War. See William Manchester, American Caesar, 1st ed. (New York: Little, Brown and Company, 1978), p. 568.

[45]Wu Mingjie, "Guojun Youxin, Gongjian Pinxian Wo Taipingdao Haiyu" (Taiwan military alarmed--PRC warships regularly appear in Taiwan's Spratly Island waters), China Times, July 11, 2005, p. 1.

[46]Wu Mingjie, "Lixing Bizhan; Taiping Dao gai Haixunshu Zhushou" (War avoidance is ideal--Spratly Island garrison to be turned over to coast guard), China Times, July 11, 2005, p. 2, and Wu Mingjie, "Taipingdao Zhoubian daojiao duo cao zhanling" (Island reefs surrounding Spratly all occupied by China), China Times, July 11, 2005, p. 2. See also "Guangzhou Junqu Kongjun, Nanhai Jiandui, Shoudu Shenhai Lianyan" (Guangzhou Military Region air force, South Sea fleet, hold first deep ocean joint military drills), Shijie Ribao (New York), June 12, 2003.

[47]Wu Mingjie, "Taipingdao jian jichang, taioqi zhuquan zhengyi? Guofangbu, Haixunshu: rendao kaoliang" (Airport construction on Spratly, does it provoke a controversy on sovereignty? Defense ministry and coast guard: humanitarian considerations), China Times, December 16, 2005, p. 2, and Central News Agency, "Government Has Plans for Airstrip on Taiping Island," Taipei Representative Office in the U.K. Taiwan Update No. 49, December 16, 2005, at www.tro-taiwan.roc.org.uk/dc/ nsl151205m.htm (January 4, 2007).

[48]Neither Itu Aba nor Pratas was formally transferred to China after Japan's defeat in World War II. Itu Aba was French prior to 1939, annexed by Japan in 1941, and finally occupied by Republic of China forces from Taiwan in June 1956. The U.S. Navy operated a radar station on Itu Aba from 1969 to 1971. "Dalu meiti zha Tai tiaozhan Nanhai Chenji; Taiwan fangmian junbei zai Taipingdao jian jichang" (PRC media blasts Taiwan: Challenge to tacit understanding in South China Sea, Taiwan plans airstrip on Taiping), World Journal (New York), January 7, 2006, p. A8.

[49]A Chinese space tracking station at the eastern end of Tarawa island had its radar dishes aligned northward toward the U.S. Army missile testing base at the Marshall Islands' Kwajalein Atoll, 1,000 km away. See Agence France-Presse, "China Rushes to Pull Down Atoll Satellite Tracker," November 27, 2003, at www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2003/11/27/ 2003077400 (January 4, 2007). See also Zhu Jianling, "Zhonggong Shenmi Jidi, Zuyue 15 nian" (PRC had secret 15-year base lease), China Times, November 8, 2003, p. 10.

[50]"Hu Jintao yu Song Chuyu Huitan Dacheng Liuxiang Gongshi" (Hu Jintao and Song Chuyu reach a six-item consensus), Renmin Wang (Beijing), May, 12, 2005. See also Xinhua News Agency (Beijing), "No 'Taiwan Independence,' No Military Conflicts: Communiqué," May 12, 2005, at www.news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-05/12/content_2951496.htm (January 4, 2007).

[51]On September 12, 2005, Soong told reporters: "When I visited Beijing in May, China's President Hu Jintao told me that there would not be any military threat facing Taiwan as long as it does not declare independence." Later, when asked whether he would encourage his PFP legislators to pass the defense budget in return for direct air links between Taiwan and China, Soong refused to respond. He Shizhong, a PRC Taiwan Affairs official present at the exchange, warned that there was no need for "a certain defense capacity" on Taiwan, and Soong did not contradict him. Agence France-Presse, "Taiwan Opposition Shoots Down Arms Package," September 13, 2005, at www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=1099478&C=asiapac (February 13, 2006). See also "Song Chuyu: Liangan Bubi Ti Junshi Huxiang Jizhi, Zai Liangan Qingying Luntan Changyi 'Jianli Jingji Huxin Jizhi'; Jia Qinglin Ti Sidian Hezuo Jianyi" (James Soong: Two sides do not need military mutual confidence mechanism, calls for 'establishment of economic mutual confidence mechanism,' Jia Qinglin proposes four point cooperation agreement), Shijie Ribao, September 16, 2005, and "Taishang Cu Song Zancheng Jungou huan Zhihang, Dangzhe Guotaiban Guanyuande Mian, Tiwen Jianrui" (Taiwan businessmen urge James Soong to trade arms budget for direct links, slap in face to Taiwan affairs officials, questions sharp), Shijie Ribao, September 16, 2005, p. 2.

[52]Wang, "Pan-Greens Blast Ma over Proposed Pact with China." The Pentagon estimates that over 800 such missiles were deployed against Taiwan as of the beginning of 2006 and that the number has been increasing at a rate of 100 per year. See U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Secretary of Defense, The Military Power of the People's Republic of China, May 23, 2006, pp. 29 and 38, at www.defenselink.mil/pubs/pdfs/China%20Report%202006.pdf (January 4, 2007). Taiwanese officials now say there are 900 missiles. See Max Hirsch, "Joseph Wu Slams China's Invasion Plans," Taipei Times, November 10, 2006, p. 1, at www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2006/11/10/2003335579 (January 4, 2007).

[53]Taiwan defense officials say that SM-2 air defense missiles have a given lifespan, and they plan to stagger procurement in order to avoid having to replace all of the missiles at the same time.

[54]Private notes on JINSA flag officers' Taiwan trip, March 6-12, 2005.

[55]The Pentagon now assesses that "China's expansion of missile and other military forces opposite Taiwan has continued unabated, with the balance of forces shifting in the mainland's favor." See U.S. Department of Defense, The Military Power of the People's Republic of China, p. 3.

[56]Conversations with Taiwan legislators.

[57]For example, Singapore has elaborate military training programs in Taiwan. See John J. Tkacik, Jr., and Dana Dillon, "China's Quest for Asia," Policy Review, No. 134 (December 2005/January 2006), pp. 29-40, at www.policyreview.org/134/dillon.html (January 4, 2007).

[58]See, for example, Caroline Hong, "Lien, Paal Discussed China Visit--KMT," Taipei Times, April 23, 2005, p. 1, at www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2005/04/23/2003251569 (January 4, 2007), and Lawrence Chung, "US 'May Be Using Spy Scandal as Warning'; Washington Could Be Playing Up Incident as a Way of Telling Taiwan's Chen to Go Easy on Separatist Remarks, Say Analysts," Straits Times (Singapore), September 23, 2004.

[59]An unidentified KMT official reportedly observed that, because the second Hu-Lien meeting would take place so soon before Hu's visit to the United States on April 20, 2006, "it would be worth noting the effect it would have on US-China-Taiwan relations." See Xiao Xucen, "Lian-Ma Mitan; Ma qing Lian zhuanhua Hu Jintao" (In secret meeting--Ma Ying-jeou asks Lien Chan to pass message to Hu Jintao), China Times, April 11, 2006. Prior to Lien's departure for China, Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian asked Lien to confirm with Hu that the 1992 Consensus on "one China" meant "One China, each side with its own definition." Lien reportedly said that he would not raise the definition issue with Hu. See "Yi Zhong Ge Biao; Qunian yi ti; Zhuanhua Hu Jintao Lian Zhan bu Jiezhao" (One China each defines; already raised last year; Lien Chan won't raise again with Hu Jintao), China Times, April 4, 2006, and "Hu Lian bu ti Yi Zhong Ge Biao; Hu Jintao jianchi jiuer gongshi; Lien Zhan qiangdiao jingji" (Lien and Hu do not mention one China separate interpretations, Hu Jintao insists on 92 consensus, Lien Chan places emphasis on economy), World Journal, April 16, 2006, at www.worldjournal.com/wj-ch-news.php?nt_seq_id=1341961 (January 4, 2007).

[60]Peter W. Rodman, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, prepared statement in hearings, The Taiwan Relations Act: The Next Twenty-Five Years, Committee on International Relations, U.S. House of Representatives, 108th Cong., 2nd Sess., April 21, 2004, p. 23, at www.internationalrelations.house.gov/archives/108/93229.pdf (January 4, 2007).

[61]In a press interview, former Bush Administration National Security Council official Michael Green wondered aloud: "If Washington gets annoyed again, what signals will Taiwan's Central American allies begin picking up from the State Department the next time they are lobbied by Beijing to switch relations?" Presumably, they had been "picking up" sympathetic signals about Taiwan. "The Gambit Behind the NUC's Removal," Taipei Times, February 24, 2006, p. 4, at www.taipeitimes.com/ News/taiwan/archives/2006/02/24/2003294388 (January 4, 2007).

[62]U.S. Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report, February 6, 2006, p. 29, at www.defenselink.mil/qdr/report/Report20060203.pdf (January 4, 2007).

[63]See U.S. Department of Defense, The Military Power of the People's Republic of China, p. 5.

[64]See President Harry Truman's instructions to General George C. Marshall in U.S. Department of State, United States Relations with China, with Special Reference to the Period 1944-49 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949), p. 133 (emphasis added). This document is also known as the "China White Paper."

[65]For more information, see Shirley A. Kan, "Taiwan: Major U.S. Arms Sales Since 1990," Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, updated November 9, 2006, at www.fas.org/spg/crs/weapons/RL30957.pdf (January 6, 2007).

[66]Congress Daily, April 6, 2006; Vago Muradian, "U.S.-Taiwan Relations; Come Clean on Subs," Defense News, February 13, 2006, p. 28; and Wendell Minnick,"Taiwan Claims US Navy Is Sabotaging SSK Plans," Jane's Defence Weekly, February 15, 2006, at www4.janes.com/subscribe/jdw/doc_view.jsp (January 8, 2007).

[67]The Navy's actions seem quite clearly to have run counter to U.S. defense procurement practices. U.S. federal acquisition regulations require the passing of certain milestones and design reviews before the appropriation of additional funding for construction.

Heritage Foundation Leadership for America

Sign Up For Our Mailing Lists