- Published on
The Hoover Institution's Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region invites you to The Taiwan Relations Act at 47: Taiwan's Evolving Hedging Strategy amidst Intensifying Global Competition on Monday, April 6, 2026 from 4:00-5:30 pm PT in the Herbert Hoover Memorial Building, Room 160.
As we mark the 47th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), the geopolitical landscape of the Indo-Pacific has reached a critical inflection point. The Hoover Institution is honored to host Dr. David Lee for an in-depth discussion on Taiwan’s evolving "Hedging Strategy" amidst intensifying global competition.
Since 1979, the TRA has served as the bedrock of unofficial relations between the United States and Taiwan, ensuring regional peace and stability. However, as the complexity of the Taipei-Washington-Beijing triangle grows, Taiwan's strategic maneuvering has shifted from traditional diplomacy to a multifaceted hedging approach.
This discussion will explore the resilience of the TRA to assess how the legal framework of the Taiwan Relations Act adapts to modern security challenges 47 years later, and an analysis of Taiwan’s current policy of balancing economic integration, military deterrence, and international participation through the strategic hedging.
Since 1979, the TRA has served as the bedrock of unofficial relations between the United States and Taiwan, ensuring regional peace and stability. However, as the complexity of the Taipei-Washington-Beijing triangle grows, Taiwan's strategic maneuvering has shifted from traditional diplomacy to a multifaceted hedging approach.
This discussion will explore the resilience of the TRA to assess how the legal framework of the Taiwan Relations Act adapts to modern security challenges 47 years later, and an analysis of Taiwan’s current policy of balancing economic integration, military deterrence, and international participation through the strategic hedging.
ABOUT THE SPEAKERS
Dr. David Ta-wei Lee is a distinguished Taiwanese statesman and career diplomat whose service spans over four decades. He has held the highest echelons of power across Taiwan’s foreign policy, national security, and cross-strait sectors. He is the chairman of Straits Exchange Foundation in 2020 and from 2023 to 2024. He formerly served as the Minister of Foreign Affairs from 2016 to 2018, Secretary-General of the National Security Council of Taiwan from 2018 to 2020, and the Secretary-General to the President since 2020 to 2023. He was also the Representative to the United States (2004–2007), Canada (2007–2012), and the European Union/Belgium (2001–2004).
As a seasoned "veteran" of the diplomatic corps, Dr. Lee is highly respected for his professionalism and non-partisan approach. Moving from the Foreign Ministry to the National Security Council and the Presidential Office, Dr. Lee transformed traditional diplomacy into a broader national security strategy.
In 2019, while serving as Secretary-General of the NSC, Dr. Lee met with then-U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton. This marked the first meeting between top national security officials of the two countries since 1979, representing a historic milestone in U.S.-Taiwan relations.
Dr. David Lee occupies a unique place in the history of the Taiwan Relations Act (1979), serving as both a witness to its creation and a guardian of its implementation. A leading scholar on the TRA, Dr. Lee authored The Making of the Taiwan Relations Act, published by Oxford University Press. Derived from his doctoral research at the University of Virginia, this work remains a definitive analysis of the 1979 legislative struggle between the U.S. Congress and the Executive Branch.
During the pivotal moment when the U.S. shifted recognition from Taiwan to China, Dr. Lee was a researcher at the time, and Dr. Frederick Chien was the Deputy Minister of Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He personally attended the Congressional hearings that shaped the TRA, gaining firsthand insight into the legal framework for unofficial relations.
Throughout his career, particularly as Representative to the U.S. (2004–2007) and Foreign Minister, Dr. Lee was the primary official responsible for ensuring the U.S. upheld its commitments under the TRA. He frequently advocated for the "Six Assurances" and worked to ensure that the TRA remained a living document capable of supporting Taiwan’s security and arms sales.
Dr. David Ta-wei Lee is a distinguished Taiwanese statesman and career diplomat whose service spans over four decades. He has held the highest echelons of power across Taiwan’s foreign policy, national security, and cross-strait sectors. He is the chairman of Straits Exchange Foundation in 2020 and from 2023 to 2024. He formerly served as the Minister of Foreign Affairs from 2016 to 2018, Secretary-General of the National Security Council of Taiwan from 2018 to 2020, and the Secretary-General to the President since 2020 to 2023. He was also the Representative to the United States (2004–2007), Canada (2007–2012), and the European Union/Belgium (2001–2004).
As a seasoned "veteran" of the diplomatic corps, Dr. Lee is highly respected for his professionalism and non-partisan approach. Moving from the Foreign Ministry to the National Security Council and the Presidential Office, Dr. Lee transformed traditional diplomacy into a broader national security strategy.
In 2019, while serving as Secretary-General of the NSC, Dr. Lee met with then-U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton. This marked the first meeting between top national security officials of the two countries since 1979, representing a historic milestone in U.S.-Taiwan relations.
Dr. David Lee occupies a unique place in the history of the Taiwan Relations Act (1979), serving as both a witness to its creation and a guardian of its implementation. A leading scholar on the TRA, Dr. Lee authored The Making of the Taiwan Relations Act, published by Oxford University Press. Derived from his doctoral research at the University of Virginia, this work remains a definitive analysis of the 1979 legislative struggle between the U.S. Congress and the Executive Branch.
During the pivotal moment when the U.S. shifted recognition from Taiwan to China, Dr. Lee was a researcher at the time, and Dr. Frederick Chien was the Deputy Minister of Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He personally attended the Congressional hearings that shaped the TRA, gaining firsthand insight into the legal framework for unofficial relations.
Throughout his career, particularly as Representative to the U.S. (2004–2007) and Foreign Minister, Dr. Lee was the primary official responsible for ensuring the U.S. upheld its commitments under the TRA. He frequently advocated for the "Six Assurances" and worked to ensure that the TRA remained a living document capable of supporting Taiwan’s security and arms sales.
Larry Diamond is the William L. Clayton Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, the Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), and a Bass University Fellow in Undergraduate Education at Stanford University. He is also professor by courtesy of political science and sociology at Stanford, where he lectures and teaches courses on democracy (including an online course on EdX). At Hoover, he co-leads the Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region and participates in the Program on the US, China, and the World. At FSI, he is among the core faculty of the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law, which he directed for six and a half years. He leads FSI’s Israel Studies Program and is a member of the Program on Arab Reform and Development. He also co-leads the Global Digital Policy Incubator, based at FSI’s Cyber Policy Center. He served for thirty-two years as founding coeditor of the Journal of Democracy. Diamond’s research focuses on global trends affecting freedom and democracy and on US and international policies to defend and advance democracy. His book Ill Winds: Saving Democracy from Russian Rage, Chinese Ambition, and American Complacency (2019; paperback ed. 2020) analyzes the challenges confronting liberal democracy in the United States and around the world and offers an agenda for strengthening and defending democracy at home and abroad. His other books include In Search of Democracy (2016), The Spirit of Democracy (2008), Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation (1999), Promoting Democracy in the 1990s (1995), and Class, Ethnicity, and Democracy in Nigeria (1989). He has edited or coedited more than fifty books, including China’s Influence and American Interests (2019, with Orville Schell), Silicon Triangle: The United States, Taiwan, China, and Global Semiconductor Security (2023, with James O. Ellis Jr. and Orville Schell), and The Troubling State of India’s Democracy (2024, with Šumit Ganguly and Dinsha Mistree).
Admiral James O. Ellis Jr. is Annenberg Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution, where he oversees both the Global Policy and Strategy Initiative and the George P. Shultz Energy Policy Working Group. He retired from a 39-year career with the US Navy in 2004. He has also served in the private and nonprofit sectors in areas of energy and nuclear security. A 1969 graduate of the US Naval Academy, Ellis was designated a naval aviator in 1971. His service as a navy fighter pilot included tours with two carrier-based fighter squadrons and assignment as commanding officer of an F/A-18 strike fighter squadron. In 1991, he assumed command of the USS Abraham Lincoln, a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. After selection to rear admiral, in 1996, he served as a carrier battle group commander, leading contingency response operations in the Taiwan Strait. His shore assignments included numerous senior military staff tours. Senior command positions included commander in chief, US Naval Forces, Europe, and commander in chief, Allied Forces, Southern Europe, during a time of historic NATO expansion. He led US and NATO forces in combat and humanitarian operations during the 1999 Kosovo crisis. Ellis’s final assignment in the navy was as commander of the US Strategic Command during a time of challenge and change. In this role, he was responsible for the global command and control of US strategic and space forces, reporting directly to the secretary of defense.
- Published on
The Hoover Institution's Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region held a public session on Resilient Realists: How Taiwan Navigates Its Future in a Turbulent World on March 2, 2026 from 1:00-2:30 PM PT.
About the Featured Speaker
Dr. Hung-mao Tien is the President and Chairman of the Institute for National Policy Research in Taipei, and board member of several foundations and business corporations in Taiwan. He also serves as a Senior Advisor to the President of the Republic of China (Taiwan). From 2000-2002, he was the Minister of Foreign Affairs. He also served as the chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation, the semi-official body in Taiwan responsible for direct exchanges and dialogue with the People's Republic of China, Representative (ambassador) to the United Kingdom, and presidential advisor to former President Lee Teng-hui. He has also served in an advisory capacity to Harvard University’s Asia Center, The Asia Society in New York, and the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C.
Dr. Tien has taught in universities in both the US and Taiwan as professor of political science. His numerous publications in English (author, editor and co-editor) include: Government and Politics in Kuomintang China 1927-37 (Stanford University Press); The Great Transition: Social and Political Change in the Republic of China (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press); and Democratization in Taiwan, Implications for China (St. Anthony’s Series, Oxford University), Consolidating the Third Wave Democracies, Themes and Perspectives(Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press), China Under Jiang Zemin(Rienner), and The Security Environment in the Asia-Pacific (M.E. Sharpe). He received his Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Dr. Hung-mao Tien is the President and Chairman of the Institute for National Policy Research in Taipei, and board member of several foundations and business corporations in Taiwan. He also serves as a Senior Advisor to the President of the Republic of China (Taiwan). From 2000-2002, he was the Minister of Foreign Affairs. He also served as the chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation, the semi-official body in Taiwan responsible for direct exchanges and dialogue with the People's Republic of China, Representative (ambassador) to the United Kingdom, and presidential advisor to former President Lee Teng-hui. He has also served in an advisory capacity to Harvard University’s Asia Center, The Asia Society in New York, and the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C.
Dr. Tien has taught in universities in both the US and Taiwan as professor of political science. His numerous publications in English (author, editor and co-editor) include: Government and Politics in Kuomintang China 1927-37 (Stanford University Press); The Great Transition: Social and Political Change in the Republic of China (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press); and Democratization in Taiwan, Implications for China (St. Anthony’s Series, Oxford University), Consolidating the Third Wave Democracies, Themes and Perspectives(Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press), China Under Jiang Zemin(Rienner), and The Security Environment in the Asia-Pacific (M.E. Sharpe). He received his Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Event Theme
Since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, geopolitical competition between the United States and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has rapidly intensified, and the global order has faced growing strains. Through it all, Taiwan has remained remarkably resilient. In the face of relentless diplomatic, economic, and military pressure from Beijing, Taiwan’s leaders have leveraged the island’s critical role in global technology supply chains, its reputation as a robust liberal democracy, and its strategic position in the Indo-Pacific to deepen engagement with key world powers. As many Americans question core assumptions of the post-Cold War global order, the PRC’s military power continues to grow, and the world stands on the cusp of a technological revolution in artificial intelligence, can Taiwan continue to navigate so deftly through turbulent geopolitical waters?
To address these topics, the Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region at the Hoover Institution held a fireside chat featuring Dr. Hung-mao Tien, President of the Institute for National Policy Research (INPR) in Taipei and a former Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of China (Taiwan). Dr. Tien joined in conversation by Adm. (Ret.) James O. Ellis, the Annenberg Distinguished Visiting Fellow, and Dr. Larry Diamond, the William L. Clayton Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, geopolitical competition between the United States and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has rapidly intensified, and the global order has faced growing strains. Through it all, Taiwan has remained remarkably resilient. In the face of relentless diplomatic, economic, and military pressure from Beijing, Taiwan’s leaders have leveraged the island’s critical role in global technology supply chains, its reputation as a robust liberal democracy, and its strategic position in the Indo-Pacific to deepen engagement with key world powers. As many Americans question core assumptions of the post-Cold War global order, the PRC’s military power continues to grow, and the world stands on the cusp of a technological revolution in artificial intelligence, can Taiwan continue to navigate so deftly through turbulent geopolitical waters?
To address these topics, the Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region at the Hoover Institution held a fireside chat featuring Dr. Hung-mao Tien, President of the Institute for National Policy Research (INPR) in Taipei and a former Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of China (Taiwan). Dr. Tien joined in conversation by Adm. (Ret.) James O. Ellis, the Annenberg Distinguished Visiting Fellow, and Dr. Larry Diamond, the William L. Clayton Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution.
- Published on
The Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region held a Panel Discussion on Partners in Need?: Tracking Europe-Taiwan Relations amidst Global Disruption on Friday, February 27, 2026 from 12:00-1:30 p.m. PT in the Annenberg Conference Room, George P. Shultz Building.
The Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region held a Panel Discussion on Partners in Need?: Tracking Europe-Taiwan Relations amidst Global Disruption on Friday, February 27, 2026 from 12:00-1:30 p.m. PT in the Annenberg Conference Room, George P. Shultz Building.
Since 2020, ties between Taiwan and Europe have seen a sharp uptick, both with the European Union and with individual states. Europe’s approach to Taiwan has shifted from relative marginality toward greater strategic relevance. Growing parliamentary engagement, expanding economic and technological cooperation, and more frequent political exchanges reflect a broader reassessment of Europe’s external partnerships. Rather than a single policy turn, this shift results from incremental adjustments across EU institutions and individual states, driven by changing assessments of risks and benefits associated with engagement with Taiwan.
To explore these developments, the Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific held a discussion between Matej Šimalčík, the Executive Director of the Central European Institute of Asian Studies, and Gabrielius Landsbergis, a visiting fellow at Stanford. Mr. Šimalčík is the co-author of a new report exploring the patterns of relations between Taiwan and the states of Europe. Mr. Landsbergis was the Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Lithuania and oversaw the opening of a a Taiwanese representative office in Vilnius. The People’s Republic of China reacted to this step by demanding that Lithuania close or at least rename the office, and Beijing imposed a full boycott of Lithuanian products. This economic retaliation violated EU rules and ultimately provoked pushback from Brussels, in a dispute that continues today.
Since 2020, ties between Taiwan and Europe have seen a sharp uptick, both with the European Union and with individual states. Europe’s approach to Taiwan has shifted from relative marginality toward greater strategic relevance. Growing parliamentary engagement, expanding economic and technological cooperation, and more frequent political exchanges reflect a broader reassessment of Europe’s external partnerships. Rather than a single policy turn, this shift results from incremental adjustments across EU institutions and individual states, driven by changing assessments of risks and benefits associated with engagement with Taiwan.
To explore these developments, the Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific held a discussion between Matej Šimalčík, the Executive Director of the Central European Institute of Asian Studies, and Gabrielius Landsbergis, a visiting fellow at Stanford. Mr. Šimalčík is the co-author of a new report exploring the patterns of relations between Taiwan and the states of Europe. Mr. Landsbergis was the Former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Lithuania and oversaw the opening of a a Taiwanese representative office in Vilnius. The People’s Republic of China reacted to this step by demanding that Lithuania close or at least rename the office, and Beijing imposed a full boycott of Lithuanian products. This economic retaliation violated EU rules and ultimately provoked pushback from Brussels, in a dispute that continues today.
- Published on
On behalf of Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region and its National Security Task Force, the Hoover Institution held The World’s Most Dangerous Place? Assessing the Prospects for War and Peace in the Taiwan Strait on Tuesday, November 14, 2023 at 12:00 PM PT.
In recent years, numerous analysts have warned of an increasing risk of war in the Taiwan Strait. Others, however, have argued that military conflict remains unlikely, and that the risk of war should not be over-hyped. Drawing from his recent book, Scott Kastner outlines a framework through which to assess the prospects for military conflict between China and Taiwan. Drawing on international relations theory, Kastner outlines several causal pathways through which a Taiwan Strait conflict could occur, and assesses how broad trends in China-Taiwan-US relations are affecting the likelihood of these different scenarios. He concludes with policy suggestions for how actors in Beijing, Taipei and Washington could mitigate the risks of a war in the Taiwan Strait.
In recent years, numerous analysts have warned of an increasing risk of war in the Taiwan Strait. Others, however, have argued that military conflict remains unlikely, and that the risk of war should not be over-hyped. Drawing from his recent book, Scott Kastner outlines a framework through which to assess the prospects for military conflict between China and Taiwan. Drawing on international relations theory, Kastner outlines several causal pathways through which a Taiwan Strait conflict could occur, and assesses how broad trends in China-Taiwan-US relations are affecting the likelihood of these different scenarios. He concludes with policy suggestions for how actors in Beijing, Taipei and Washington could mitigate the risks of a war in the Taiwan Strait.
About the Participants
Scott L. Kastner is a professor in the Department of Government and Politics at the University of Maryland, College Park. He graduated from Cornell University and received his Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of California, San Diego. His books include Political Conflict and Economic Interdependence across the Taiwan Strait and Beyond (Stanford University Press, 2009); China’s Strategic Multilateralism: Investing in Global Governance (Cambridge University Press, 2019; with Margaret Pearson and Chad Rector); and War and Peace in the Taiwan Strait (Columbia University Press, 2022).
Kharis Templeman is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and part of the Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific. Templeman is a political scientist (Ph.D. 2012, Michigan) with research interests in Taiwan politics, democratization, elections and election management, party system development, and politics and security issues in Pacific Asia.
Kharis Templeman is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and part of the Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific. Templeman is a political scientist (Ph.D. 2012, Michigan) with research interests in Taiwan politics, democratization, elections and election management, party system development, and politics and security issues in Pacific Asia.
- Published on
[This talk was cancelled and will be rescheduled at a later date.]
On behalf of Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region and its National Security Task Force the Hoover Institution invites you to The World’s Most Dangerous Place? Assessing the Prospects for War and Peace in the Taiwan Strait on Thursday, May 4, 2023 at 12:00 PM PT.
In recent years, numerous analysts have warned of an increasing risk of war in the Taiwan Strait. Others, however, have argued that military conflict remains unlikely, and that the risk of war should not be over-hyped. Drawing from his recent book, Scott Kastner outlines a framework through which to assess the prospects for military conflict between China and Taiwan. Drawing on international relations theory, Kastner outlines several causal pathways through which a Taiwan Strait conflict could occur, and assesses how broad trends in China-Taiwan-US relations are affecting the likelihood of these different scenarios. He concludes with policy suggestions for how actors in Beijing, Taipei and Washington could mitigate the risks of a war in the Taiwan Strait.
This talk will draw from Prof. Kastner's new book, entitled War and Peace in the Taiwan Strait, available from Columbia University Press, November 2022.
On behalf of Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region and its National Security Task Force the Hoover Institution invites you to The World’s Most Dangerous Place? Assessing the Prospects for War and Peace in the Taiwan Strait on Thursday, May 4, 2023 at 12:00 PM PT.
In recent years, numerous analysts have warned of an increasing risk of war in the Taiwan Strait. Others, however, have argued that military conflict remains unlikely, and that the risk of war should not be over-hyped. Drawing from his recent book, Scott Kastner outlines a framework through which to assess the prospects for military conflict between China and Taiwan. Drawing on international relations theory, Kastner outlines several causal pathways through which a Taiwan Strait conflict could occur, and assesses how broad trends in China-Taiwan-US relations are affecting the likelihood of these different scenarios. He concludes with policy suggestions for how actors in Beijing, Taipei and Washington could mitigate the risks of a war in the Taiwan Strait.
This talk will draw from Prof. Kastner's new book, entitled War and Peace in the Taiwan Strait, available from Columbia University Press, November 2022.
Speaker Bio
Scott L. Kastner is a professor in the Department of Government and Politics at the University of Maryland, College Park. He graduated from Cornell University and received his Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of California, San Diego. His books include Political Conflict and Economic Interdependence across the Taiwan Strait and Beyond (Stanford University Press, 2009); China’s Strategic Multilateralism: Investing in Global Governance (Cambridge University Press, 2019; with Margaret Pearson and Chad Rector); and War and Peace in the Taiwan Strait (Columbia University Press, 2022).
Scott L. Kastner is a professor in the Department of Government and Politics at the University of Maryland, College Park. He graduated from Cornell University and received his Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of California, San Diego. His books include Political Conflict and Economic Interdependence across the Taiwan Strait and Beyond (Stanford University Press, 2009); China’s Strategic Multilateralism: Investing in Global Governance (Cambridge University Press, 2019; with Margaret Pearson and Chad Rector); and War and Peace in the Taiwan Strait (Columbia University Press, 2022).
- Published on
On behalf of Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region and its National Security Task Force, the Hoover Institution invites you to a talk by Caitlin Talmadge, associate professor of Security Studies in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, entitled Then What? Assessing the Military Implications of Chinese Control of Taiwan on Friday, March 3, 2023 from 12:00 - 1:15 pm PT. To attend, register at the event page.
Talk Abstract
The military implications of Chinese control of Taiwan are understudied. Chinese control of Taiwan would likely improve the military balance in China's favor because of unification's positive impact on Chinese submarine warfare and ocean surveillance capabilities. Basing Chinese submarine warfare assets on Taiwan would increase the vulnerability of U.S. surface forces to attack during a crisis, reduce the attrition rate of Chinese submarines during a war, and likely increase the number of submarine attack opportunities against U.S. surface combatants. Furthermore, placing hydrophone arrays off Taiwan's coasts for ocean surveillance would forge a critical missing link in China's kill chain for long-range attacks. This outcome could push the United States toward anti-satellite warfare that it might otherwise avoid, or it could force the U.S. Navy into narrower parts of the Philippine Sea. Finally, over the long term, if China were to develop a large fleet of truly quiet nuclear attack submarines and ballistic missile submarines, basing them on Taiwan would provide it with additional advantages. Specifically, such basing would enable China to both threaten Northeast Asian sea lanes of communication and strengthen its sea-based nuclear deterrent in ways that it is otherwise unlikely to be able to do. These findings have important implications for U.S. operational planning, policy, and grand strategy.
The military implications of Chinese control of Taiwan are understudied. Chinese control of Taiwan would likely improve the military balance in China's favor because of unification's positive impact on Chinese submarine warfare and ocean surveillance capabilities. Basing Chinese submarine warfare assets on Taiwan would increase the vulnerability of U.S. surface forces to attack during a crisis, reduce the attrition rate of Chinese submarines during a war, and likely increase the number of submarine attack opportunities against U.S. surface combatants. Furthermore, placing hydrophone arrays off Taiwan's coasts for ocean surveillance would forge a critical missing link in China's kill chain for long-range attacks. This outcome could push the United States toward anti-satellite warfare that it might otherwise avoid, or it could force the U.S. Navy into narrower parts of the Philippine Sea. Finally, over the long term, if China were to develop a large fleet of truly quiet nuclear attack submarines and ballistic missile submarines, basing them on Taiwan would provide it with additional advantages. Specifically, such basing would enable China to both threaten Northeast Asian sea lanes of communication and strengthen its sea-based nuclear deterrent in ways that it is otherwise unlikely to be able to do. These findings have important implications for U.S. operational planning, policy, and grand strategy.
Speaker Bio
Caitlin Talmadge is associate professor of Security Studies in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, as well as Senior Non-Resident Fellow in Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution, and Research Affiliate in the Security Studies Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. During fall 2022 she also holds the Kissinger Chair in Foreign Policy and International Relations at the United States Library of Congress.
Professor Talmadge’s research and teaching focus on deterrence and escalation, U.S. military operations and strategy, and security issues in Asia and the Persian Gulf. She is author of The Dictator’s Army: Battlefield Effectiveness in Authoritarian Regimes (Cornell, 2015), which Foreign Affairs named the Best Book in Security for 2016 and which won the 2017 Best Book Award from the International Security Studies Section of the International Studies Association. In addition, she is co-author of U.S. Defense Politics: The Origins of Security Policy (fourth edition, Routledge, 2021), and she is currently writing a book with Professor Brendan Green on nuclear escalation risk in the emerging deterrence environment.
Caitlin Talmadge is associate professor of Security Studies in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, as well as Senior Non-Resident Fellow in Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution, and Research Affiliate in the Security Studies Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. During fall 2022 she also holds the Kissinger Chair in Foreign Policy and International Relations at the United States Library of Congress.
Professor Talmadge’s research and teaching focus on deterrence and escalation, U.S. military operations and strategy, and security issues in Asia and the Persian Gulf. She is author of The Dictator’s Army: Battlefield Effectiveness in Authoritarian Regimes (Cornell, 2015), which Foreign Affairs named the Best Book in Security for 2016 and which won the 2017 Best Book Award from the International Security Studies Section of the International Studies Association. In addition, she is co-author of U.S. Defense Politics: The Origins of Security Policy (fourth edition, Routledge, 2021), and she is currently writing a book with Professor Brendan Green on nuclear escalation risk in the emerging deterrence environment.
- Published on
On behalf of The Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region (PTIP) and its National Security Task Force, the Hoover Institution invites you to Taiwanese at the UN: The Use and Abuse of UN Resolution 2758 on Tuesday, May 31, 2022 from 11:30am-12:45pm PDT.
In 1971, UN Resolution 2758 granted the seat occupied by the Republic of China in the General Assembly and the Security Council to the People's Republic of China (PRC). In recent years, the PRC has attempted to reinterpret this resolution as an endorsement of its "One China Principle," and it has promoted the fallacy that UN member states came to a determination that Taiwan was a part of the PRC. Yet, as the historical official records show, member states made no such determination about Taiwan's international status.
This effort around Resolution 2758 is part of a broader campaign by the PRC to expand its influence in UN-affiliated bodies. Taiwan remains the foremost target of this campaign. Since 2016, at Beijing's behest, Taiwanese representatives have been blocked from participating even as observers in international organizations such as the World Health Assembly (WHA) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). The PRC has institutionalized and normalized its stance on Taiwan within these organizations by signing secret agreements, restricting the access of Taiwan nationals to the UN and its facilities, and embedding PRC nationals across various levels of UN staff. The UN and its specialized agencies have not made the texts of these agreements available to the public or to any entity beyond the main signatories, though leaked guidance memos provide insights into the scope of MOU contents.
In this event, Jessica Drun will discuss Beijing’s efforts to “internationalize” its “One China Principle" and to conflate it with UN Resolution 2758. Her remarks will draw on a recent report, co-authored with Bonnie Glaser of the German Marshall Fund, that documents Beijing’s expanding influence in UN-linked organizations. She will be joined by Chih-Fu Yeh, a PhD candidate in biology at Stanford University, who in December 2020 was improperly barred from joining a UNESCO-backed winter school session because of his Taiwanese nationality. Mr. Yeh will describe his own experience and highlight how overly strict interpretations of UN regulations and guidelines continue to impose real costs on Taiwanese citizens.
This effort around Resolution 2758 is part of a broader campaign by the PRC to expand its influence in UN-affiliated bodies. Taiwan remains the foremost target of this campaign. Since 2016, at Beijing's behest, Taiwanese representatives have been blocked from participating even as observers in international organizations such as the World Health Assembly (WHA) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). The PRC has institutionalized and normalized its stance on Taiwan within these organizations by signing secret agreements, restricting the access of Taiwan nationals to the UN and its facilities, and embedding PRC nationals across various levels of UN staff. The UN and its specialized agencies have not made the texts of these agreements available to the public or to any entity beyond the main signatories, though leaked guidance memos provide insights into the scope of MOU contents.
In this event, Jessica Drun will discuss Beijing’s efforts to “internationalize” its “One China Principle" and to conflate it with UN Resolution 2758. Her remarks will draw on a recent report, co-authored with Bonnie Glaser of the German Marshall Fund, that documents Beijing’s expanding influence in UN-linked organizations. She will be joined by Chih-Fu Yeh, a PhD candidate in biology at Stanford University, who in December 2020 was improperly barred from joining a UNESCO-backed winter school session because of his Taiwanese nationality. Mr. Yeh will describe his own experience and highlight how overly strict interpretations of UN regulations and guidelines continue to impose real costs on Taiwanese citizens.
Jessica Drun is a Nonresident Fellow with the Atlantic Council’s Global China Hub. She has also held positions in the defense contracting space and the National Bureau of Asian Research. Ms. Drun specializes in cross-Strait relations, Taiwan politics, and U.S.-Taiwan relations and regularly provides commentary on these issues. She is fluent in Mandarin Chinese.
Chih-Fu Yeh is a PhD candidate studying microbial community ecology and evolution in Department of Biology at Stanford University. He was born and raised in Taiwan. In Winter 2020, Chih-Fu applied to a ICTP/UNESCO winter school session on quantitative systems biology, and was denied permission to attend the event because of his Taiwanese nationality.
- Published on
On April 6, Phillip Saunders of National Defense University spoke about PLA modernization and its implications for Taiwan's defense strategy and U.S.-Taiwan security cooperation. The talk abstract is below; the video is now available at the Project on Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific event page.
Drawing upon the new book Crossing the Strait: China’s Military Prepares for War with Taiwan, Dr. Saunders will discuss China’s available military options, how organizational reforms and new capabilities have improved the PLA’s ability to execute these options, the current cross-strait military balance, the challenges China would face in trying to resolve the Taiwan issue by force, and how Beijing weighs military, economic, and political factors in its evolving Taiwan policy calculus. His presentation will draw upon extensive open-source analysis of PLA efforts to build the necessary power projection capabilities and discuss how lessons learned from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine may affect thinking in China, Taiwan, and the United States.
Featuring Phillip C. Saunders Director, Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs National Defense University, followed by conversation with Kharis Templeman, Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Featuring Phillip C. Saunders Director, Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs National Defense University, followed by conversation with Kharis Templeman, Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution.
- Published on
Russia’s military buildup around Ukraine has triggered the most serious crisis in relations between Russia and the West since the end of the Cold War. Over 100,000 Russian troops are deployed near the border with Ukraine, poised to launch a major military assault at a moment’s notice. While these developments appear only to affect European security, American commentators have been quick todraw parallels to Taiwan.
The similarities seem obvious. Like Ukraine, Taiwan faces an existential threat from one of Eurasia’s great autocratic powers, and it is also a Western-oriented democracy that the United States has an interest in keeping free from coercion. Both Ukraine and Taiwan are being framedas critical test cases of America’s willingness to uphold global norms against the use of military force to seize territory. Some observers have even gone so far as to argue that their fates will be linked: a failure to respond to military action against Ukraine would weaken American credibility and invite an attack on Taiwan by the People’s Republic of China.
Put simply, this is lazy analysis. In the current geopolitical moment, the differences between Ukraine and Taiwan are far more important than their similarities — and linking together the security threats that the two countries face can make both situations worse. The United States should not continue to divert limited resources away from the Indo-Pacific, where the military balance is shifting in China’s favor over the next decade, to a region that is both less crucial to American interests and where the balance of power is more advantageous to Washington. U.S. prioritization, not reputation, is what really matters for Taiwan’s security.
The similarities seem obvious. Like Ukraine, Taiwan faces an existential threat from one of Eurasia’s great autocratic powers, and it is also a Western-oriented democracy that the United States has an interest in keeping free from coercion. Both Ukraine and Taiwan are being framedas critical test cases of America’s willingness to uphold global norms against the use of military force to seize territory. Some observers have even gone so far as to argue that their fates will be linked: a failure to respond to military action against Ukraine would weaken American credibility and invite an attack on Taiwan by the People’s Republic of China.
Put simply, this is lazy analysis. In the current geopolitical moment, the differences between Ukraine and Taiwan are far more important than their similarities — and linking together the security threats that the two countries face can make both situations worse. The United States should not continue to divert limited resources away from the Indo-Pacific, where the military balance is shifting in China’s favor over the next decade, to a region that is both less crucial to American interests and where the balance of power is more advantageous to Washington. U.S. prioritization, not reputation, is what really matters for Taiwan’s security.
The rest of this commentary appears at War on the Rocks.
- Published on
On February 18, I had the privilege of joining a strong group of witnesses in testifying before the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission on the topic of "Deterring PRC Aggression toward Taiwan." The USCC has a congressional mandate "to monitor, investigate, and submit to Congress an annual report on the national security implications of the bilateral trade and economic relationship between the United States and the People’s Republic of China, and to provide recommendations, where appropriate, to Congress for legislative and administrative action."
I can still remember when I first became familiar with the depth and quality of USCC's annual report, when I was an undergraduate taking -- what else? -- Chinese politics with Melanie Manion at the University of Rochester. Parts of it were assigned reading then, and parts no doubt still are now, 20 years later, in the many Chinese security and politics courses around the country. So it is gratifying and a bit humbling to be in a position to contribute in some small way to the next iteration.
I also want to note here that, while I was an undergraduate, I received crucial funding from the National Security Education Program (NSEP, now known as the Boren Awards) to study abroad in Beijing and Taipei. That experience kindled my interest in Taiwan, set me on my current trajectory and, quite literally, changed my life. I hope that robust funding for studying the language and culture of countries that have national security implications for the United States will be available for years to come--it is a smart investment in our future, and an increasingly important incentive to learn a foreign language in an era when the numbers of American students studying abroad in China has dropped precipitously.
I would not be in a position today to contribute to the public conversation on Taiwan's security issues without the help of the Boren program, and I hope my testimony last week will go some small way toward repaying the investment NSEP made in me and my career.
I can still remember when I first became familiar with the depth and quality of USCC's annual report, when I was an undergraduate taking -- what else? -- Chinese politics with Melanie Manion at the University of Rochester. Parts of it were assigned reading then, and parts no doubt still are now, 20 years later, in the many Chinese security and politics courses around the country. So it is gratifying and a bit humbling to be in a position to contribute in some small way to the next iteration.
I also want to note here that, while I was an undergraduate, I received crucial funding from the National Security Education Program (NSEP, now known as the Boren Awards) to study abroad in Beijing and Taipei. That experience kindled my interest in Taiwan, set me on my current trajectory and, quite literally, changed my life. I hope that robust funding for studying the language and culture of countries that have national security implications for the United States will be available for years to come--it is a smart investment in our future, and an increasingly important incentive to learn a foreign language in an era when the numbers of American students studying abroad in China has dropped precipitously.
I would not be in a position today to contribute to the public conversation on Taiwan's security issues without the help of the Boren program, and I hope my testimony last week will go some small way toward repaying the investment NSEP made in me and my career.
The full video of the panel and the written testimony, including my own, are available at the USCC hearing website. In addition, since it is much abridged from the written testimony, I have posted my oral remarks below.
Good morning. Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today. I have been asked to cover quite a lot of ground in my written testimony, so in my oral remarks I’m going to focus on my comparative advantage in this hearing: How to Assess Taiwan’s Will to Fight.
Assessing Taiwan’s “Will to Fight”
“Will to fight” is a vague concept, and assessing it a hard thing to do rigorously. But we do have at least three kinds of data we can observe to give us some purchase on this question: public opinion, budgets, and willingness to serve in the military.
Public Opinion
The first is public opinion data. There are many surveys of defense and security-related issues conducted every year. I’m not going to go through them in detail, but simply note that when you look at the general patterns that appear consistent across surveys, they support four key observations.
First, Taiwanese on the whole are not very confident about their own military’s ability to defend the country—especially alone—against an attack by the PRC. There is a great deal of pessimism.
Second, they are generally much more confident in their fellow Taiwanese. About 2/3 – ¾ think most others would actively resist a PRC attack. And, their own willingness to resist is closely correlated with their estimates of how many others also do so.
Third, the majority of Taiwanese – anywhere from 2/3 to ¾ -- indicate willingness to participate in the defense of Taiwan as long as the US is also involved. If the US is not involved, this share drops below half. So US participation in the defense of Taiwan has an important psychological and morale-boosting element as well as a practical one.
And fourth, the majority of Taiwanese remain confident that the United States would intervene to stop a PLA invasion, even if Taiwanese leaders themselves triggered an attack by declaring independence.
So, to sum up: if they believe the US will also be involved, most Taiwanese are willing to resist, and think most others will too. If they believe the US will not, then most will not. Beliefs about our presence is a critical variable in Taiwanese “will to fight.”
Defense Budgets
A second way to assess Taiwan’s “will to fight” is to look at defense budgets. Until recently, these data have suggested a half-hearted commitment to defending itself.
Starting in the mid-1990s, Taiwan’s defense budget in real terms flattened out for 20 years. It declined as a share of GDP from about 5% in 1994 to about 2% in 2016. Last year Taiwan spent in real terms roughly what it spent in 1994. Meanwhile, the PRC spent 25 times what it spent in 1994.
We all know that Taiwan cannot keep up with the PRC’s increases, which have generally been in proportion to GDP growth.
What is more striking is Taiwan’s relative decline even compared to other states in the region. For instance, in 1989, Taiwan spent about 2/3 of what SK spent. In 2020, it spent less than 1/3. Put bluntly, going by budgets, Taiwan looks like it’s shirking on defense.
However, this has changed significantly in the past four years. Taiwan’s announced defense budget has increased in local currency terms by about 40%: from 321 bn NTD in 2016, to 453 bn in 2021, and the share of the central government budget going to defense has climbed back to 20 percent, a level it has not been at since 1999.
That is at least a start and suggests that under President Tsai Ing-wen, Taiwan is committing significantly more resources to its own defense.
Willingness to Serve in the Military
A third type of data we can use to assess this question is willingness to join the military. Here the patterns are not encouraging. In 2012, the Ma Ying-jeou administration approved a phase-out of conscription, to be replaced by an all-volunteer force. This transition has been repeatedly delayed, so that today, all adult able-bodied men are still required to serve four months—not enough time to learn much of use and develop into capable reserves.
The main reason is repeated shortfalls in recruiting. Put simply, most young Taiwanese have no interest in joining. And their brief time as conscripts does not change their minds. Most young people see the military as a path of last resort, only if they have no other options. So, we observe a contradiction: young Taiwanese are the most pro-Taiwan, anti-China, pro-democracy and pro-independence of any generation, but the vast majority would never consider volunteering to join the military.
This might be changing as a potential confrontation with the PRC looms larger, as the military threat becomes more salient—and as the military acquires new high-profile platforms. But this is an area that requires a great deal of work from the MND and civilian leadership to improve the public image of the military, and to strengthen Taiwan’s training and reserve system.
Recommendations
1. Strengthen the credibility of US commitment to Taiwan through NON-military ties. The ability to deter a Taiwan Strait crisis rests crucially on beliefs that the US would act to counter PRC coercion because it is in our own interests to do so.
That belief has weakened in Asia over the last four years, in part because the previous administration put up trade barriers and pulled out of the TPP. One way to reverse impressions that we will not be committed to Asia is to reengage in regional trade negotiations.
As one example, the USTR should open bilateral trade negotiations with Taiwan as soon as is feasible. Taiwan needs economic gestures of support as well as military ones, and bilateral trade talks would be a clear sign of deepening cooperation. If the Biden administration eventually decides to re-commit to negotiations for the CPTPP, use the leverage this opportunity offers to insist on Taiwan’s (and South Korea’s) participation in membership negotiations as well.