KAOHSIUNG: Last week, Taiwan President William Lai unveiled a massive $40 billion supplemental defense procurement proposal, casting it as proof that the independently ruled, democratic island is serious about countering escalating military pressure from the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The PRC has not governed Taiwan for even a single day but claims it as its territory.

A State Department spokesperson told Fox News Digital that, “We welcome Taiwan’s announcement of a new $40 billion special defense procurement budget. Consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act and more than 45 years of commitment across multiple U.S. Administrations, the United States supports Taiwan’s acquisition of critical defense capabilities, commensurate with the threat it faces.” 

The spokesperson also commended Taipei, “We also welcome the Lai administration’s recent commitments to increase defense spending to at least 3% of GDP by 2026 and 5% of GDP by 2030, which demonstrates resolve to strengthen Taiwan’s self-defense capabilities.”

CHINA’S ENERGY SIEGE OF TAIWAN COULD CRIPPLE US SUPPLY CHAINS, REPORT WARNS

The American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) – the de facto American embassy – responded very positively almost immediately after Lai’s proposal was announced. Courtney Donovan Smith, a political columnist for the Taipei Times, told Fox News Digital that the strong support from AIT, “Amounts to a public American stamp of approval.”

A day after Lai’s announcement, Taiwan’s Defense Minister, Wellington Koo, told the media that preliminary talks have already been held with the United States about the kinds of weapons it wants to buy as part of this budget that would run from 2026 to 2033. But Koo said he could not make any details of discussions public until Congress receives a formal notification.

Yet some in Taiwan expressed concern that the language from the administration was somewhat understated, and didn’t come from senior-enough officials. 

Those worried about what they perceive as a muted tone from the Trump administration wondered if the timing could be sensitive, coming shortly after President Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping agreed to a trade deal, and just days after Xi phoned Trump to reiterate Beijing’s claims over Taiwan, claims the U.S. “acknowledges” but does not accept.

Even so, Taipei-based political risk analyst and Tamkang University assistant professor Ross Feingold told Fox News Digital that U.S. support fundamentally has not shifted and that when it comes to U.S. weapons sales to Taiwan, “If Taiwan is a willing buyer, the Trump administration is likely to be a willing seller.”

Also causing distress to the fragile egos of China’s communist leaders is Japan’s new Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, a conservative who became Japan’s first female prime minister in October. She appeared to break long-standing Japanese strategic ambiguity over Taiwan when, asked on Nov. 7 in parliament whether a Chinese attack on Taiwan would qualify as “a situation threatening Japan’s survival.”

Takaichi didn’t deflect with a “I don’t comment on hypotheticals.” Instead, she said, “If there are battleships and the use of force, no matter how you think about it, it could constitute a survival-threatening situation.”

Under Japan’s 2015 security law, that designation could allow Japanese military action in defense of an ally.

TAIWAN GENERAL WARNS CHINA’S MILITARY DRILLS COULD BE PREPARATION FOR BLOCKADE OR WAR, VOWS TO RESIST

China predictably lashed out, immediately calling her remarks “egregious.” A Chinese diplomat in Osaka escalated further, reposting coverage on X with a threat-like warning: “The dirty head that sticks itself in must be cut off.”

Kerry K. Gershaneck, a visiting scholar at National Chengchi University and a former U.S. Marine counterintelligence officer, told Fox News Digital that the U.S. needed to clearly denounce China for threats against Japan and the Japanese prime minister. Gershaneck warned that Asian allies remember past U.S. abandonment” under what he called the “do not provoke China!” policy of the Obama administration. “Unless high-level Washington officials signal stronger support, he said, “the Trump 47 administration risks going down in history as Barack Hussein Obama’s third term.”

Feingold noted that while Takaichi’s stance was enthusiastically received in Taiwan, the excitement “was unsustainable and not based on a formal policy decision by Japan to defend Taiwan.”

Following reports that President Trump phoned the Japanese prime minister and requested that she dial down talk about Taiwan, Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Kihara Minoru issued a strong denial, saying Trump did not advise Takaichi to “temper the tone of her comments about Taiwan.”

While the geopolitical shifts grabbed headlines, Lai’s real challenge is domestic. Taiwan has a single-chamber legislature, and Lai’s Democratic Progressive Party does not have a majority.

Cheng Li-wun, the new chair of the main opposition Kuomintang (KMT), campaigned against boosting defense spending to 5% of GDP and has repeatedly argued Taiwan is “not an ATM” for “unreasonable” military budgets. The KMT supports renewed engagement with Beijing and acceptance of the “1992 Consensus,” a proposed framework that allows both sides to claim there is “one China” while interpreting the meaning differently. Lai rejects that position entirely, calling it a path toward subordination to China.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Bryce Barros, associate fellow at GLOBSEC and a former U.S. Senate national security advisor, told Fox News Digital that there are serious hurdles. “Opposition leaders have cited cuts to other essential services like healthcare, lack of details on how the budget will be paid for and concerns over more hostilities with China,” he said. But Barros said the head of the de facto American embassy has called for bipartisan support for the bill, and he noted Lai needs only six opposition defections for the vote to pass.

Analysts also stress the proposal is not solely for U.S. weapons. Lai wants major investment in domestic defense manufacturing, including a “dome” anti-missile system, which could help blunt accusations of excessive spending to curry favor with Washington. But the plan still faces a volatile parliament and certain retaliation from China.

Published on 03/12/2025 – 11:44 GMT+1
•Updated
11:51

European ministers called on Wednesday for increased pressure on Moscow following US-Russia talks in which Vladimir Putin appeared to have made no concession to end the conflict in Ukraine.

“Until I see anything different, then I’m going to continue to draw the conclusion that Russia does not want peace,” Sweden’s Maria Malmer Stenegard told reporters upon arriving at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers.

“That is why we need to stick to the two-point plan – increase the support to Ukraine and increase the pressure on Russia – and we need to hit them where it hurts most, and that is the oil and gas revenues,” she added.

The NATO ministerial summit, which United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio is skipping, comes a day after Russian President Vladimir Putin welcomed Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner for talks on ending the war in Ukraine.

The latest round of talks came after the leak of a new peace plan proposal hammered out between Washington and Moscow that shocked Ukrainians and Europeans alike with its heavily pro-Russian tilt.

This set off a new flurry of diplomatic contacts across Europe, with Ukrainian negotiators also meeting with Witkoff to refine the plan before the Moscow meet-up.

Foreign ministers meeting in Brussels on Wednesday said they had not yet been debriefed after the talks, which the Kremlin described as “constructive”, but they took the view that Putin appeared to have stuck to his usual delaying tactic.

US and Russian representatives have held several rounds of negotiations since Trump reopened channels of communication with Putin in February, with the two men meeting over the summer in Alaska. A second such summit was canned by Washington after Russia stuck to its maximalist demands.

“We see that the United States are engaged in the process, they put the diplomatic efforts to achieve a long-lasting peace,” Lithuania’s Kęstutis Budrys told reporters upon arriving at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers.

“What hasn’t changed during this half a year is Russia’s position,” he said. “They’re absolutely not interested in either ceasefire or peace agreement, and they continue to do what they are doing. So for us this is the reason to prepare the finances (for Ukraine) for the next year.”

Finland’s Elina Valtonen echoed the analysis, telling reporters that “so far we haven’t seen any concessions from the side of the aggressor, which is Russia”.

The Estonian minister, Margus Tsahkna, agreed: “From our perspective, what we see is that Putin has not changed any goals (…) that’s why the way to put more restrictions on Ukraine is the wrong way. Actually we must put more pressure on Russia,” he said.

“This is exactly what we are going to discuss today: what can we do more?”

All three countries back using some of the nearly €200 billion in frozen Russian Central Bank assets to create a so-called “reparations loan” to provide financing to Ukraine for the next two years.

The proposal, made at the EU level, is being blocked by Belgium, where the bulk of the assets are currently held.

For Estonia’s Tsahkna, the scheme is the “leverage” Europe has to “actually putting itself around the table to negotiate what kind of deal will be in the future”.

“Putin cannot decide over us. And as well, (the) US cannot make decisions instead of us,” he said.

But Maxime Prévot, Belgium’s foreign minister, doubled down on his country’s opposition to the reparations loan, describing it “as the worst” option on the table that “entails consequential economic, financial and legal risks”.

“We are not seeking to antagonise our partners or Ukraine; we are simply seeking to avoid potentially disastrous consequences for a Member State that is being asked to show solidarity without being offered the same solidarity in return,” he added.

The European Commission is expected to release later on Wednesday its legal proposal on the options it has previously identified to finance Ukraine’s needs, including the reparations loan.