In recent statements, President Chen Shui-bian (
After his election in 2000, the situation was tense: not only did China threaten to attack Taiwan, but the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) faithful in the military and security agencies didn't appreciate the election of the pro-independence Chen.
Chen and his advisers thought it prudent to try to smooth matters over by making a statement saying, "As long as the Chinese communist regime does not intend to use force against Taiwan, I promise that during my term I will not declare independence, will not change the name of the country, will not push for the incorporation of a special state-to-state model of cross-strait relations in the Constitution and will not push for a referendum on the independence-unification issue that will change the status quo. Nor will there be any question of abolishing the National Unification Guidelines or the National Unification Council."
It does not need to be emphasized that the qualifier "as long as the Chinese communist regime does not intend to use force against Taiwan" was all-important.
However, Chen was lectured time and again by arrogant and defeated KMT politicians and back-seat driving US think-tank figures alike that he should stick to the "five noes" no matter what China did.
After three years of continuing military threats and a more than doubling of the number of missiles aimed at Taiwan, Chen has now come to the conclusion that the "five noes" have reached the end of their useful life. That is to be applauded.
The fact is that the "five noes" were never popular among his core followers.
They saw the "five noes" as unnecessary roadblocks on the road to full democracy in Taiwan and full acceptance of the nation in the international community.
With the presidential election coming up, Chen is emphasizing the right of the people to hold a referendum and implying that the "five noes" might be about to meet their demise.
He is achieving two purposes: he is rallying his supporters and at the same time making it clear to the world community that China is the real threat to stability and peace across the Taiwan Strait.
There are some in the US administration, and in think tanks and the international media, who perceive Chen to be unnecessarily provocative.
These people should look twice: China is continuing to threaten Taiwan, preventing its international relations from blossoming, and building up an awesome arsenal of missiles aimed at the nation. During the past three years, Chen has bent over backwards to be conciliatory and has held out one olive branch after another only to be rebuffed by China time and again.
It is thus time for Taiwan and the international community to move towards a "three yeses" policy:
Yes to the right of Taiwanese people to determine their own future, free of interference from China;
Yes to Taiwan's right to be a full, equal member of the international community, including the UN; and
Yes to the right of Taiwanese people to choose a name, flag, and anthem which really represent Taiwan.
Instead of kowtowing to Beijing, the US should have an evenhanded policy which upholds the basic principles of democracy and human rights.
It is indeed time for clarity instead of ambiguity.
But the remarks of US President George W. Bush on the occasion of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's (
There is still time: Bush and his administration should make it crystal clear to Beijing that they must back off, dismantle the missiles aimed at Taiwan, and, if it truly believes in peaceful resolution, enter into talks with the democratically-elected government of Taiwan.
The US and other nations would also do well to rethink their policy towards Taiwan: it is not the same country as it was 30 or 40 years ago, when the present "one China" concept came into existence.
At that time, there was a repressive KMT regime, which had lost the Chinese Civil War and imposed itself on a defenseless Taiwanese population. The KMT's decades-long insistence on being the legitimate government of China was as laughable as it was outdated, but it dragged the Taiwanese people unwillingly into the unfinished business of the Chinese Civil War.
The Taiwanese had no part in that Civil War, but their future is still being held hostage to it.
It is time for the international community to break out of the chains that it has imposed on itself and accept Taiwan and its people as full-fledged members of the international family of nations.
Gerrit van der Wees is the editor of Taiwan Communique.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS