Bush Backs Arms Sale with Tough Talk

AN STYLE="font-size: 75%; color:#990000; font-weight:bold">Friday, Apr. 27, 2001 It's not easy to tell who emerged the winner in the United States decision this week to sell Taiwan another basketful of weapons. The shopping cart sounds impressive: President George W. Bush offered Taipei eight diesel-powered submarines, four Kidd-class destroyers, 12 P-3C Orion aircraft, MH-53E mine- sweeping helicopters, AAV7A1 amphibious assault vehicles, an Avenger surface-to- air missile system, and an assortment of torpedoes. It sounds like a lot of firepower. And from the howls emanating from Beijing -- and the cheers coming from conservative supporters of Taiwan in the U.S. -- it might be reasonable to conclude that Bush cut Taiwan the best arms deal since his father gave Taiwan approval to purchase 150 F-16 fighters in 1992.

But perhaps the deal is not as good as it first seemed. Taiwan had three big- ticket items at the top of its wish list submitted to Washington: new destroyers armed with the sophisticated Aegis weapons system, Patriot PAC-3 missiles, and diesel-powered attack submarines. Bush turned down the request for the high- tech, Aegis-equipped destroyers -- Beijing had warned of grave consequences should the sale go ahead -- as well as the new Patriot anti-missile missiles, which are so new that they are only now being deployed with U.S. military units. The official terminology used by Bush was that he was "deferring" his decision on permitting the sale of these two important and sophisticated weapons systems. That sounded encouraging, but Taiwan will not be seeing these toys any time soon -- if, indeed, ever.

In place of the Aegis destroyers, Bush agreed to sell Taiwan four Kidd-class destroyers. That's like asking for a new Porsche, and getting a used, but low mileage, Ford. The Kidds were originally built in the 1970s for the Shah of Iran, but went undelivered when an unfavorable change of government took place in that country. The U.S. mothballed the destroyers while trying to peddle them to friends and allies. No one was interested -- until Taiwan. The Kidds will require at least two years of refitting before they are delivered to the island Beijing refers to as a "renegade province."

More interesting, though, are the eight new submarines that the U.S. promised to "assist" Taiwan in procuring. The catch is in the wording: the U.S. has not built a conventionally powered submarine since the early 1960s so, in effect, Washington has no subs to sell. The best submarine technology on the open market today (aside from boats made in Russia but sold to Taiwan's adversary China) comes from Germany and the Netherlands. And that's where the problem lies.

Both the Germans and the Dutch made it clear this week that they would not co- operate with any American attempt to build subs for Taiwan. It was the Dutch who sold two submarines to Taipei in the 1980s, incurring the wrath of Beijing in the process. This put their relations with Beijing in the deep freeze for several years; in 1984, the Dutch announced that they would no longer sell any weapons to Taiwan.

Even if the Dutch should change their policy -- something its diplomats declare to be "extremely unlikely" -- the process of building new submarines in conjunction with the U.S. would be a long and painful process. The Dutch should know. In 1995 the Americans promised the Egyptians that they would help Cairo secure a diesel-powered sub. In October 2000, five years after the announcement, Dutch and American companies finally signed a letter of intent with the Egyptian government to begin planning the project. Still to be hammered out are contracts, costs, designs, and procurement of weapons systems. Then they will actually have to build the boat. Delivery date: 2008. Maybe!

So where is President Bush going to find the subs to sell to Taiwan? Who knows? The U.S. Navy admits it has no plans hidden away in some drawer. Check with the folks who run America's shipyards, and they deny getting any calls from Washington. "No prep work has been done," admits Pentagon spokesman Admiral Craig Quigley. "But if the (Taiwanese) express that interest (in submarines), we are confident that we can find a way to make that happen." The Taiwanese -- and their supporters in the U.S. -- are also sure that they will get their boats. Says one source in Washington familiar with the negotiations: "Ways will be found to deliver. This administration knows that Taiwan's friends in Washington will be watching this very closely."

In the days following the arms sale approval, those friends of Taiwan have been hearing good things from Bush. There is no doubt now that Bush and his administration have tilted towards Taipei. In an interview with the Washington Post newspaper the day after the deal, Bush said that he believed the long tradition of reviewing arms sales to Taiwan each year in April was unnecessary, and that he would review and approve sales "as needed." This pleased Taiwan's supporters, who now say that once a new evaluation of Taiwan's ground forces is completed they will be back in Washington with a new shopping list. An item certain to be on the list: U.S. Apache combat support helicopters. And Taiwan's supporters are convinced that Bush will agree.

Things got even more interesting the following day when Bush gave another media interview. Asked if he would use the full force of American military to defend Taiwan, should China attack, the President replied that he would do "whatever it took" to help Taipei. This commitment was far more direct and unequivocal than American Presidents have traditionally offered. Washington's vast corps of policy wonks and defense experts have since been debating whether this means that America has abandoned its policy of "strategic ambiguity," which committed Washington to the defense of Taiwan, but left vague precisely how far America would go. Officials from the State Department and the White House, furiously backpedaling for the President, jumped in and assured everyone that the American policy of the last 20 years remains in place.

O.K., maybe U.S. policy towards Taiwan hasn't officially changed. But it is clear that Taiwan does have a friend in the highest place in Washington -- even if he is not always willing to share his best and shiniest military toys.

• In an interview with TIME magazine aboard Air Force One on April 25, President Bush defended his position on U.S. relations with China and Taiwan. Asked about his offer to sell a major arms package to Taipei -- while rejecting a request for Aegis-equipped destroyers -- the President replied: "My job is to uphold the spirit of the Taiwan Relations Act, and I did so, with a very robust package. It appeared to me that the Taiwanese were very grateful.

"Secondly, I recognize our relationship with China is going to be very complex, but it is in our nation's interest for us to find areas where we can agree and to work on areas where we disagree. And I'm going to do so. It's in our interest to trade. We've had a lot of folks saying, well, we shouldn't trade with China. I disagree: It's in our economic interest to trade, but it's also more likely to cause freedom to occur in China. And Lord knows we need freedom. After all, Catholic bishops were hauled in the other day; a Catholic bishop as well as other Catholic hierarchy were arrested, which is not right.

"So we need to have the ability to say to China, you know, this is wrong. And at the same time, say let's work together on trade. I'm convinced that my administration will take a realistic approach to what is a very important and complex relationship."