Strategists and war planners in Taipei are very happy that a new security triangle has been formed among Japan, Australia and the United States.They believe a Japan-Australia joint declaration on security cooperation signed in Tokyo gives Taiwan an added assurance of support in time of war with China.Their glee may be premature.
Both Shinzo Abe, Japanese prime minister, and his Australian counterpart John Howard who inked the joint declaration on March 13, took pains to emphasize the closer security relationship between their two countries is not directed against China, while the declaration is not exactly a treaty or agreement which is more emphatic and higher in status.In fact, Australia wanted a formal agreement signed, but Japan disagreed, because the Japanese government was sure the Diet that has to ratify the pact would not do so. Nonetheless, Australia now has a security relationship with Japan, which is closer than with any other country except the United States.It has the ANZUS pact on security with New Zealand and the United States, under which they will come to each other’s aid in the event of an attack on any of them by a third party.
China is not quite happy.Beijing has more than legitimate suspicion that China is being contained by the new Japan-Australia-US security triangle.The containment will not be complete until after India joins to expand the triangle.Although the expansion is not expected to materialize in the foreseeable future, China can conclude the security triangle as part of Washington’s containment strategy to curb its expansionary role in Asia and the Pacific.At any rate, the United States considers China a potential adversary.
All Asian nations are watching the rise of China with awe.They are concerned, no matter how hard Beijing may try to tell them China’s rise is peaceful.It is only natural for Australia as well as Japan to seek an extra insurance coverage as part of their triangular security mechanism.The Abe-Howard declaration is an earnest rather than a sales contract.
That is why in the preamble of the declaration, the two prime ministers affirmed the common strategic interests and security benefits embodied in the respective alliance relationships of their two countries with the United States, committed to strengthening trilateral cooperation, and recognized that strengthened bilateral cooperation will be conducive to the enhancement of trilateral cooperation.They pledged “bilateral cooperation on regional and global security challenges, including terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery, and humane security concerns such as disaster relief and pandemics, as well as their contributions to regional peace and stability.”
In areas of cooperation, Japan and Australia promised to work together to combat transnational crime, strengthen border security and counterterrorism, exchange strategic assessments and related information, improve maritime and aviation security, and carry out peace and humanitarian relief operations.The two countries would exchange personnel, conduct joint exercises and training in the area of humanitarian relief operations and coordinate activities in law enforcement, peace operations and regional capacity building.
For implementation, the two nations will further strengthen the strategic dialogue between their foreign ministers and build on the dialogue between their defense ministers on an annual basis.They will also develop an action plan with specific measures to advance security cooperation.
Strategic ambiguity is applied to such promises as the development of an action plan for advance security cooperation and the coordination of “regional capacity building” to pave the way for a future arrangement like Japan’s treaty of mutual cooperation and security with the United States, in case China’s continued rise threatens peace in the Asia-Pacific region.But great care was taken to avoid any wording in the declaration which might offend the People’s Republic of China.
That gives Taipei no cause of joy over the advent of the security triangle.It is true that the ANZUS treaty makes it difficult for Australia to stay out of trouble with China, if Taiwan were attacked and the United States got involved in the hostilities, without damaging its American alliance, which is vital to its security.In all likelihood, however, Australia would not sacrifice its Chinese interests for Taiwan.Australia’s relations with China are based on economic realities, with both countries gaining from bilateral trade and exchanges.China secures much needed resources from Australia, while Australia is expanding its economic opportunities in China.These practical and vital realities prompted Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer to say Taiwan may not be covered under the ANZUS pact, should China attack the island.
All these realities are also quite clear to China.That must be the reason why Beijing reacted calmly to the signing of the joint declaration in Tokyo. Qin Gang, spokesman of the Foreign Ministry in Beijing, made no comment directly on the new security triangle.After insisting China is posing no military threat to Asia and the Pacific, Qin merely said: “We hope relevant countries … can take into consideration the concerns of relevant countries so as to maintain peace and stability in the region. … We hope what they say is true.At the same time, China will not threaten other countries.We are tranquil in our heart.”
China truly does not have any worry, so long as it keeps its word.If it does not threaten peace and stability of the region, the newly made security arrangement between Japan and Australia will never evolve into a mutual cooperation and defense pact.Despite its double-digit increase in defense spending year after year, China is rising peacefully and threatening no countries save Taiwan.On the other hand, Taiwan is under no threat of invasion from China, if the status quo is maintained.Beijing can afford to take in strides the Japan-Australia-US security triangle, which has gladdened only those people who wish Taiwan would break relations with China.
（本文刊載於96.03.26 中國時報第A13版，本文代表作者個人意見）
