The news that Washington has canceled the highest level US-Taiwan defense talks that take place each year is a reminder of the inability of the Bush administration to conduct sensible foreign policy, as well as brazen hypocrisy when it comes to questions of principle.
When Washington abandons pragmatism and ideology in its diplomatic affairs, then what is left? Unfortunately, the answer seems to be "damage control."
Even diehard Republican US officials have acknowledged that President George W. Bush is quickly becoming a lame-duck president due to his mishandling of Iraq, his inability to make progress on the North Korean nuclear standoff and his frequently divisive domestic agenda.
Bush desperately wants to avoid any more crises. This now includes even minor rows with Beijing over what has been an eight-year tradition -- the yearly US-Taiwan security forum in Monterey, California.
The problem with such reactive diplomacy is that it is shortsighted and sends the wrong message to Washington's allies, as well as its enemies -- or "strategic competitors" as the politically correct call them.
The tension between China and Taiwan is neither a minor trade dispute nor a diplomatic gaffe that can be papered over. A conflict could involve the world's largest economies -- the US, China and Japan -- in a direct confrontation over vital strategic interests.
Yet the Bush administration once again demonstrates its lack of imagination as it sacrifices what is clearly in the US' interest -- support for a democratic state on the periphery of its security frontier -- just so that Bush can have a nice, quiet photo-op with a tyrant.
Certainly, increased US engagement with China is in everyone's best interests, and if millions of impoverished Chinese can be lifted out of abject destitution, then all of humanity will benefit. And, of course -- as the platitude-purveyors at the US State Department love to chant -- the US has an interest in maintaining a healthy, stable relationship with China.
But this does not mean that Washington has to cower in the face of an oppressive authoritarian regime simply because the latter offers promises of cheap consumer electronics.
The White House is making a grave mistake allowing itself to be influenced by Chinese President Hu Jintao's (胡錦濤) visit next month. After all, the trip is an exercise in fluff, and the most substantial thing that is likely to come of it is hours of TV coverage of two men in suits sitting in chairs with half-smiles on their faces.
Few people believe that a conflict between Taiwan and China is likely; fewer still believe it to be imminent. This is probably so, and so long as cool heads and good sense prevail, it will never happen.
But the lessons of history are clear, and it is foolish to put one's faith in the good sense of politicians -- especially politicians who are rarely accountable to anyone for anything, such as China's leaders.
Before it decides to sacrifice necessary security preparations, the US would do well to remember that everything it achieved in East Asia came at the price of blood.
The shattered husks of fighters and warships that litter the ocean floor from the Solomons to Okinawa -- and rivers of blood from soldiers and civilians -- mark the last time an ultra-nationalist, militant state had to be brought to heel in the region.
Does anyone want to see that happen again?
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS