Taiwan: Subtext on deferred submarine
deal By David Isenberg
WASHINGTON - One might think that with the
recent rhetoric from China regarding possible US arms
sales to Taiwan, the arms pipeline from the US
military-industrial sector to Taiwan is bursting at the
seams. But that would be wrong.
Judging by
recent events, Taiwan is in no rush to buy new weapons.
Defense News, a US trade paper, recently reported that
Taiwan aims to slash about 16% off a planned NT$610
billion (US$18.2 billion) arms purchase from the United
States after lawmakers said the controversial package
was too expensive.
This is contrary to the
annual ritual in which Taiwan's military attaches go to
Washington with a huge weapons wish list, which China
predictably denounces. China has targeted about 500
missiles at Taiwan, and Taiwan considers this a major
threat requiring self-defense countermeasures. The US
has pledged to defend Taiwan but to sell only defensive
arms.
Taiwan Defense Minister Lee Jye said that
as part of measures planned to cut the price, his
ministry wanted to scrap a project to transfer
technology on submarine construction, which would have
cost nearly NT$73 billion. Some NT$20 billion was
expected to be cut from other areas, he said, without
elaborating.
The hold on the
submarine-technology transfer is noteworthy as China has
been especially bellicose over the plan to produce
diesel-electric submarines for Taiwan's use in the
Taiwan Strait, 120 miles wide at some points, narrower
at others.
One intriguing aspect of Taiwan's
go-slow approach on buying weapons is the possibility
that it is linked to the US presidential election.
China's People's Daily Online observed this month that
on July 29, Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian spoke out
especially to "clarify" the matter, saying that the arms
sales case had nothing to do with the US election and
the hold on the purchase of submarines was not
undertaken due to pressure or a request from the US
side.
"There are other claims on Taiwan's
revenue. There are other programs that compete for
funding," said Ted Carpenter, vice president for Foreign
Policy and Defense Studies at the Washington, DC-based
Cato Institute, a non-profit, public-policy libertarian
think-tank.
"In addition, within the KMT
[opposition Kuomintang party] there is a belief that
President Chen pursues the arms deals in order to press
a hardline policy towards China. Some party members
believe that if the deal does not go through, then the
policy will also become more moderate," Carpenter told
Asia Times Online.
John Pike, director of
GlobalSecurity.org, in Alexandria, Virginia, notes: "The
blues [Taiwan's opposition parties, including the KMT
and People First Party] don't think they need the
weapons because they don't think there will be a war.
The greens [the governing Democratic Progressive Party
and allies] think Uncle Sam will come to their rescue
swiftly and don't need them. They believe they only have
to make a stand for a week."
He told Asia Times
Online, "The rationale for arms purchase would give them
a bit more flexibility, a little bit of an escalation
option."
One reason for Taiwanese caution is the
change from a US "seller's market" to a Taiwanese
"buyer's market". Reasons for this change include a
slowdown in Taiwan's economic growth and its
deteriorating budgetary situation.
Because of
the high price tag of the total arms package that the
United States first announced in April 2001, legislators
are fighting over what to buy, especially since Taiwan's
budget deficit is close to 5% of its gross domestic
product. The arms deal is also becoming an issue in
legislative elections set for December because voters
prefer funds to be channeled to social welfare and
education.
In June hundreds of Taiwanese
demonstrated against the government's US$18 billion
special military budget. They demanded that Taipei
freeze the budget or else they would try to launch a
referendum on the subject. The cabinet on June 2
approved the special budget of NT$610 billion for the
purchase of advanced weaponry from the United States,
despite tensions with China.
Military
considerations also weigh heavily against a rush to buy.
In Taiwan itself there is no consensus that the island
needs the submarines. Some believe that the budget for
submarines could be used for better purposes, making the
island's defense forces more efficient. Even some US
policymakers question the cost-effectiveness of
diesel-electric submarines, and cite the long time line
before a submarine can gain an initial operational
capability. And funding for the submarines could be used
for higher-priority programs associated with C4ISR
upper-tier missile defense and anti-submarine warfare
(ASW) surveillance.
Ironically, from a Taiwanese
perspective, a new Democratic administration in the US
under John Kerry, should it come to pass, would not be
any more reluctant to sell arms to Taiwan than the
current US administration.
Last month, Senator
Kerry and his vice-presidential running mate, Senator
John Edwards, pledged if elected to continue to supply
Taiwan with defensive weapons. They made the pledge in a
252-page campaign book, Our Plan for America:
Stronger at Home, Respected in the World, in which
they provide details of their positions on domestic and
international issues. While the book reiterated the
party's commitment to a "one China" policy and a
peaceful resolution of cross-strait issues, it also said
the candidates "support Taiwan's vibrant democracy and
robust economy and will maintain America's commitment to
provide Taiwan with defensive weapons", However, like
the Democratic Party platform, the book does not
specifically endorse the Taiwan Relations Act, on which
the arms-sales pledge is based.
According to
Carpenter of the Cato Institute, "It will be a very
close fight." If any weapons purchases are deferred,
"the Aegis ships [four missile-defense destroyers, part
of the arms package] will likely be on hold for a while,
which won't make the US sad."
David
Isenberg, a senior analyst with the Washington-based
British American Security Information Council (BASIC),
has a wide background in arms-control and
national-security issues. The views expressed are his
own.
(Copyright 2004 Asia Times Online Ltd.
All rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for
information on our sales and syndication policies.)
