Dear Senator Kerry: There are more than 600,000 US citizens of Taiwanese heritage. In the November presidential election, Taiwanese Americans will vote for the candidate who firmly supports democratic Taiwan.
During the Iowa caucus you said the US should push for a "one China, two systems" for Taiwan. While Beijing promised Hong Kong 50 years of democracy under "one country, two systems," it has already reneged on that pledge. The Taiwan Relations Act says it is the objective of the US to preserve and enhance the human rights of the people of Taiwan. How can we in good conscience push the free people of Taiwan into servitude under the Chinese Communist Party's repressive rule?
We hope you simply misspoke when you suggested "one China, two systems" for Taiwan's future. The proposal is contrary to US policy toward Taiwan, which has been carefully developed by six former US presidents. But we have not seen any retraction of your Iowa statement.
The Democratic Party's platform committee came up with a draft during a recent meeting in Florida. In a one-sentence reference to Taiwan, the draft platform states: "We are committed to a `one China' policy, and will continue to support a peaceful resolution of cross-Straits [sic] issues that is consistent with the wishes and best interests of the Taiwanese people."
Missing conspicuously from the draft is any affirmation of US commitment to the Taiwan Relations Act. In contrast, the 2000 Democratic Party platform said: "A Gore administration will fulfill its responsibilities under the Taiwan Relations Act ... We support resolution of cross-Straits [sic] issues that is both peaceful and consistent with the wishes of the people of Taiwan."
The failure to affirm the Taiwan Relations Act, in combination with your suggestion of a Hong Kong-style future for Taiwan, could lead to undesirable consequences for both the US and Taiwan. Beijing could decide to actively intercede in the November election on your behalf, since your position on Taiwan appears to be much more accommodating to China's declared intent to annex Taiwan, by force if necessary. Foreign intervention in the US presidential election is not only illegal, it would be harmful to US national interests. No US president should be beholden to a foreign power because of its help in winning the White House.
The People's Liberation Army (PLA) has been actively developing the capacity to invade Taiwan with a multi-prong blitzkrieg with the aim of occupying the island before the US can react. At present, the PLA is conducting a large-scale joint-force exercise simulating an invasion of Taiwan on China's southeastern coast. Tensions across the Taiwan Strait are high. If China perceives that a Kerry administration will not honor America's commitment to help defend Taiwan, China could well decide to launch an all-out military invasion against Taiwan while US forces are still preoccupied with intractable problems in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In 2000, the Republican platform strongly affirmed the Taiwan Relations Act as follows: "We deny the right of Beijing to impose its rule on the free Taiwanese people. All issues regarding Taiwan's future must be resolved peacefully and must be agreed to by the people of Taiwan. [If China attacked Taiwan,] the United States will respond appropriately in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act. America will help Taiwan defend itself."
We strongly recommend that you instruct the Platform Committee to insert language affirming the Taiwan Relations Act into this year's platform of the Democratic Party.
We look forward to hearing your view on this matter.
Li Thian-hok is a freelance commentator based in Pennsylvania.
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
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
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
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS