The repercussions of the strong comments made by US Secretary of State Colin Powell during his two-day visit to China denying that Taiwan is an independent nation have not ended. Although a lot of effort has been exerted from different angles to interpret and clarify this incident, a diverse range of views makes the whole issue even more complicated. I think that we can regard Powell's statement as a preventive measure intended by Washington to pull Taiwan back to the status quo.
Powell's comments clearly make the following points.
First, the US does not want to see either side take unilateral action, interpret the "one China" policy, or settle on a structure for future cross-strait relations, because if they do the US will inevitably be involved in a cross-strait conflict. Therefore, the US has taken the initiative to prevent a possible war that could take place within a few years.
Second, as for the US, its best strategic advantage in the Asia-Pacific region is served by maintaining stability, and the most important factor to achieve this is by maintaining the status quo across the Taiwan Strait. When the US senses that Taiwan intends to change the current situation, it will do whatever it must to prevent any harm to US international interests.
Third, Powell's warning-like comments on Taiwan indicate that the US attaches greater importance to Sino-US relations than its relationship with Taiwan. Nor is it afraid of revealing its priorities. We cannot rule out the possibility that the US has used this statement to calm China over US arms sales to Taiwan.
Since the Bush administration declared that it has a responsibility to protect Taiwan and will do its best to assist Taiwan's national defense four years ago, to the warning signal given right before the end of this administrative term, it is foreseeable that the US will continue to pursue an increasingly defined China policy.
The next four years will be crucial in determining stability across the Taiwan Strait. How can Taiwan handle the upcoming challenges? If Taiwan refuses to face up to cross-strait issues, it will waste its current economic and political advantages, perhaps even losing the US' moral support. If we understand the inevitable nature of direct cross-strait talks, then our problem lies in how to face China's insistence on its "one China" principle.
If the "one China" principle is the inescapable crux of the matter, then how can Taiwan respond with a "one China" proposal based on its best strategic interests? The best example to soothe conflict and create prosperity should be the peace process of European integration. If we can follow the spirit of the EU, eliminate any possible military and political factors that can trigger conflicts, and launch a multi-level cooperation that can reinforce mutual trust and dependency, the stability and prosperity of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait should be guaranteed.
Therefore, we can propose the concept of "one China" based on the model of the EU as a response to China's rigid "one-China" definition. This new "one China" will give Taiwan the following guarantees:
First, maintaining Taiwan's status quo, and not changing Taiwan's sovereignty: the development of the EU is not involved in national sovereignty issues of each member country, but rather, it only emphasizes the cooperation of policy issues that are beneficial to the EU as a whole.
The issue that touches off cross-strait conflict is the controversy of Taiwan's sovereignty; if we can incorporate the spirit of the EU, and focus on the cooperation and mutual trust in diverse issues and multi-layered administration, we can develop a bilaterally beneficial partnership while avoiding sensitive issues.
Second, keeping an open mind as to the ultimate goal of an integration process: the future forms of development of the EU will not be confined to becoming a single country, a federation, a confederation, or some other forms.
A "one China" based on the EU should retain its flexibility, and put an emphasis on finding collective benefits. If the ultimate goal is defined too soon, the integration process may be impeded.
Third, the "one China" based on the EU will benefit the expansion of Taiwan's diplomacy and economy: the EU experience indicates that a strong economic community facilitates each country's respective interests. The integration of Taiwan and China will substantially help both countries' economy and trade; also, with the establishment of mutual trust [across the Taiwan Strait], Taiwan will have a broader stage before the international community.
Fourth, facilitating China's democratization: the EU can be seen as a collective body of democratic countries in Europe. The mechanism and discipline of the EU reinforce its member countries' insistence on their values of democracy; it is also the impetus for prospective member countries to promote democracy.
Taiwan's gradually maturing democracy will become the factor that influences China during the cross-strait integration process. At the same time, democratic China is the best partner for Taiwan in its sustainable development.
Within Taiwan, there are different proposals for cross-strait relations. The concept of "one China" based on the EU can not only take care of different ideologies among different factions within Taiwan, but also meet China's "one China" demand.
Francis Kan is an assistant research fellow at the Institute of International Relations, National Chengchi University.
TRANSLATED BY LIN YA-TI
A nation has several pillars of national defense, among them are military strength, energy and food security, and national unity. Military strength is very much on the forefront of the debate, while several recent editorials have dealt with energy security. National unity and a sense of shared purpose — especially while a powerful, hostile state is becoming increasingly menacing — are problematic, and would continue to be until the nation’s schizophrenia is properly managed. The controversy over the past few days over former navy lieutenant commander Lu Li-shih’s (呂禮詩) usage of the term “our China” during an interview about his attendance
Following the BRICS summit held in Kazan, Russia, last month, media outlets circulated familiar narratives about Russia and China’s plans to dethrone the US dollar and build a BRICS-led global order. Each summit brings renewed buzz about a BRICS cross-border payment system designed to replace the SWIFT payment system, allowing members to trade without using US dollars. Articles often highlight the appeal of this concept to BRICS members — bypassing sanctions, reducing US dollar dependence and escaping US influence. They say that, if widely adopted, the US dollar could lose its global currency status. However, none of these articles provide
Bo Guagua (薄瓜瓜), the son of former Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee Politburo member and former Chongqing Municipal Communist Party secretary Bo Xilai (薄熙來), used his British passport to make a low-key entry into Taiwan on a flight originating in Canada. He is set to marry the granddaughter of former political heavyweight Hsu Wen-cheng (許文政), the founder of Luodong Poh-Ai Hospital in Yilan County’s Luodong Township (羅東). Bo Xilai is a former high-ranking CCP official who was once a challenger to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for the chairmanship of the CCP. That makes Bo Guagua a bona fide “third-generation red”
US president-elect Donald Trump earlier this year accused Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) of “stealing” the US chip business. He did so to have a favorable bargaining chip in negotiations with Taiwan. During his first term from 2017 to 2021, Trump demanded that European allies increase their military budgets — especially Germany, where US troops are stationed — and that Japan and South Korea share more of the costs for stationing US troops in their countries. He demanded that rich countries not simply enjoy the “protection” the US has provided since the end of World War II, while being stingy with
RSS