I was a bit startled last week when Legislative Yuan Speaker You Si-kun (游錫堃) suggested that the United States could extend official recognition to an independent Taiwan if China were to launch an invasion. While I think Speaker You is correct, I am not sure it is a helpful point of view. Naturally, there are contingency plans in Washington on diplomatic actions that could deter Chinese military action, but they contemplate the continuity of a democratic Taiwanese government that could survive offshore in exile if part or all of Taiwan is occupied by communist Chinese forces. China’s threat that “Taiwan independence means war” must, as Speaker You clearly argues, be confronted with the consensus of the international community that “War means Taiwan Independence.” He also correctly understands that creating such an international consensus relies on the diplomatic leadership of the United States. What Speaker You is not arguing is: “Hey, guys! I have an easy way to achieve independence.”

Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) unscheduled visit to Tibet on July 20 attracted extensive international attention.

Although Chinese media said that Xi’s visit was meant to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the accession of Tibet to China, Tibet has remained a politically charged issue for China as well as the international community.

The genesis of the turbulent ties between Tibet and China dates back to 1951, when the Chinese regime annexed Tibet through a seven-point agreement. China has used this agreement as proof of its sovereignty over Tibet.

British Secretary of State for Defence Ben Wallace on Sunday last week visited Tokyo to meet with Japanese Minister of Defense Nobuo Kishi.

Wallace’s trip was far more than a simple courtesy call. The UK and Japan are clearly in the process of laying the foundations for an alliance, a development that would further complicate an already complex situation in the Indo-Pacific region.