Mr T
Senior Member
The article doesn't make any suggestions as to what this new strategy should be. It can be summarised as saying "don't do what we're doing now - we'll figure the details of a new policy later". The authors objected to the F-16 sales last year in another article. My guess is that they would object to any significant arms sales. I've seen articles by some other writers who have sometimes criticised purchases like new F-16s but at the same time made suggestions like making Taiwan a hard nut to crack via more sales of things like anti-ship missiles. These sales are the sort of things sceptics of current/previous arms sales should be welcoming if they're actually being genuine in calling for a new approach that works for Taiwan.
It's basically a garbage article. Apart from not saying what their alternative strategy is, it says arms sales may cause Taiwan to engage in "provocative behaviour" but the article it links to as evidence was their own article last year saying selling F-16s to Taiwan isn't good business. What - if Washington sells arms to Taiwan then Taiwan will provoke China by ordering more? That's a complete joke. It's like saying a kid that gets beaten up at school provokes the bully by attending self-defence classes after the bully demands he/she stops going and just agrees to hand over their lunch money every day.
I would say that 400 Harpoon IIs with launchers are more than a political statement. However, you are partly right, continued military support via arms sales does boost Taiwanese morale and give them more of a feeling there is a point in resisting Chinese aggression as they're not entirely on their own.
