Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) authorities of Taiwan should be trembling now. Former US president Donald Trump, who is the Republican Party's official 2024 presidential nominee, accused Taiwan of stealing US chip business and claimed that Taiwan "should pay" for US protection, according to Bloomberg on Tuesday. 

Trump's words reflect the strong intention of many US politicians who attempt to replenish the US economy by exploiting the Taiwan island. We wonder how the DPP authorities, who rely on the US to seek "independence," feel when they heard Trump's comment. They must be feeling on edge, terrified. 

In fact, Taiwan has been paying "protection fees" to the US, a large portion of which is spent on purchasing expensive American weapons that Taiwan can't bargain for. The US has sold arms to Taiwan over 100 times in the past more than four decades. Statistics indicate that the total arms sales from the US to the Taiwan island have surpassed $70 billion up to now. This $70 billion could have been utilized to improve the livelihoods of the people on the island and boost the economy, but instead it was used to procure American weapons and pay "pro-tection fees" to the US. "US-Taiwan collusion" not only seriously impedes Taiwan's economic development and harms the interests of people on the island, but also creates instability in the Taiwan Straits and escalates tensions.

Even so, US politicians, like Trump, are far from being satisfied. Trump mentioned in his in-terview with Bloomberg that the US is no different from "an insurance company" and Taiwan doesn't give the US anything.

Trump and his likes want to exploit Taiwan for more "protection fees," but once a conflict occurs across the Taiwan Straits, will the US really defend Taiwan because of the "protection fees" paid by Taiwan?

The US has maintained strategic ambiguity when it comes to defending Taiwan. There is currently no formal agreement requiring the US to send troops to defend Taiwan once there is a conflict in the Taiwan Straits. It would be a strategic gamble by the US to break through this framework and engage in war with another major power. The so-called US' commitment to Taiwan is not even an insurance policy.

Xin Qiang, director of the Taiwan Studies Center at Fudan University, told the Global Times that "an 'insurance company' must be responsible for repayment as long as the conditions are met. But the so-called protection of Taiwan by the US has no legal binding force, and it is entirely based on the interests of the US, not for the benefit of Taiwan." The "protection" the DPP authorities are seeking from the US with enormous money is an utterly expensive joke, and no matter how much money Taiwan spends, it will be a waste.

As those secessionists try to seek 'Taiwan independence' backed by the US, the island will have to pay further "protection fees" to satisfy the desire of the US if requests, Yuan Zheng, deputy director and a senior fellow of the Institute of American Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times. Taiwan has either the room nor the ability for bargaining if it continues to rely on the US to seek "independence."

Trump's remarks reflect the shameless but true thoughts of many US politicians. The US wants to maximize its exploitation of the Taiwan island's interests, use it to contain the mainland geopolitically, and gain economic benefits as much as possible. With the ambiguous "pro-tection" promises, the US tightly controls the DPP authorities and exploits endlessly.

The DPP authorities are obsessed with the "protection" of the US. If the DPP authorities regard the wealth that Taiwan has accumulated for decades as a tribute to the US, and totally believe the US' empty promises, it is tantamount to drinking poison to quench its thirst.

We must remind the DPP authorities not to dream of achieving "Taiwan independence" by relying on the US. When the time comes for a showdown, the US will not take huge risks to "defend Taiwan." Just as Trump said in the interview: Why are we [the US] doing this?