Why Taiwan won’t be the next Afghanistan, despite what US pundits might say

The tragedy of Afghanistan has inspired all kinds of speculation about Taipei’s supposed helplessness, possible military action by Beijing and the US’ rumoured passivity
But the US withdrawal from the ‘graveyard of empires’ does not signal its impending betrayal of Taiwan, given Taipei’s greater strategic significance

Rob York

Published: 1:30am, 19 Aug 2021

Why you can trust SCMP

The international community is rightfully horrified by unfolding events in Afghanistan, but the outrage, as it often does, is quickly turning into exaggerated interpretation.

Rather than focusing on the real tragedy of the event – the legions of Afghans who would like to escape Taliban rule and cannot because of a combination of Western xenophobia and poor planning – commentary, especially in the United States, has zeroed in on what it means for “our” credibility.

Others that will allegedly suffer for this “decline” in US credibility include Ukraine, Japan and Israel, but most of the speculation revolves around Taiwan.

This is, perhaps, compound interest from The Economist previously dubbing the Taiwan Strait “the most dangerous place on Earth” but, whatever the cause, the hot takes on possible military action by Beijing, Taipei’s supposed helplessness and the US’ rumoured passivity have flown freely and without much contemplation on whether the analogy holds.

01:31

Satellite images show crowd at Kabul airport as US and Turkish planes leave Afghanistan

Congressman Michael Waltz of Florida took to Twitter, for example, to declare that he would be “terrified” if he were in Taiwan, “knowing this is how the United States will react under this administration”. And Stuart Lau of Politico tweeted: “Imagine Beijing watching US military ‘commitment’ in Afghanistan while contemplating its next move on Taiwan.”

China’s own Global Times has weighed in on the matter, saying US “treachery” in Afghanistan should be seen as a warning for Taiwan’s “secessionists” (that is, its government and the entire Democratic Progressive Party).

“...the failure of the US in Afghanistan should serve as a warning to the secessionists in the island, who have to understand that they cannot count on Washington, as Afghanistan is not the first place where the US abandoned its allies, nor will it be the last”, the newspaper said on August 16, placing Afghanistan on a timeline of US failures that starts in Saigon and ends in Taipei.

No doubt some in the US will take Global Times’ statements as evidence that Beijing is indeed eyeing the Taiwan Strait in the near term.

China needs better friends than Taliban to make most of its rise

However, there is a reason Beijing elected to send its message through one of its state media outlets (and one with a particularly hawkish reputation) rather than, for instance, a military build-up or fresh provocation.

Chinese officials and the public are aware, to an extent that many Americans are not, of what taking back Taiwan by force would mean, and how extraordinarily costly it would be to the People’s Liberation Army and the “peaceful rise” narrative.

Military action to take back Taiwan would doubtlessly be destructive for the island, but the costs to China as a whole in terms of lives, money, and credibility would be crippling to its goals, be it for 2025, 2030, or 2049.

Not for no reason did retired PLA Air Force Major General Qiao Liang warn last year that Beijing needed to accomplish its domestic goals before it contemplated retaking Taiwan by force.

Lithuania’s Taiwan decision is aimed at upending China-EU relations

Furthermore, Beijing surely recognises the distinction between Afghanistan and Taiwan in the eyes of US policymakers and leaders. US President Joe Biden’s two immediate predecessors both recognised the futility of a perpetual occupation of Afghanistan but failed to follow through on their instincts to withdraw due to a combination of political considerations and institutional opposition.

Reminders of Afghanistan’s status as the “graveyard of empires”, where both the British and Soviets floundered, have been circulating for more than a decade, along with evidence of the Afghan government’s status as a corrupt kleptocracy with no capacity to rule the whole country without US support.

That there would be no post-Taliban Afghanistan in which liberal democracy would flourish has been common knowledge for some time; it was only a question of when the US would be willing to face the consequences of withdrawal.

01:22

Taiwan posts video of troops ‘fending off attack from mainland’ amid worsening cross-strait tensions

Taiwan, by contrast, is already a vibrant democracy and economy whose Covid-19 response has in general shone on the international stage. Whereas support among the US public for withdrawal from Afghanistan has long been strong (albeit recently weakened by the botched execution), support for strengthening ties between Washington and Taipei has steadily increased and is now bipartisan.

The US’ reputation, however tarnished by its botched withdrawal, will recover; a passive response to any military action to retake Taiwan would be a death knell for the US’ reputation abroad, however.

And not just due to optics. The main reason US withdrawal from the imperial graveyard does not signal its impending betrayal of Taiwan is because Taipei’s strategic significance far exceeds Kabul’s. Taiwan falling firmly within Beijing’s grasp would, as Japanese Defence Minister Nobuo Kishi said recently, have stark ramifications for the trade and security dynamics of the region.

None of which is to say that the US will abandon its policy of strategic ambiguity towards Taiwan, or start encouraging Taiwanese declarations of independence any time soon. Beijing’s red lines on the subject are well known, and pushing it into a situation where it feels the need to exercise its territorial claims serves neither US nor Taiwanese interests.

Instead, the Biden administration should, in the near term, signal its continued interest in cross-strait affairs without making such a promise explicit. Indeed, one expects that it will do so shortly.

Rob York is programme director for regional affairs at the Pacific Forum