While the US State Department continues to ask President Chen Shui-bian (
For the Chinese government, the cross-strait "status quo" means that Taiwan is a province of China, which is strongly opposed by most Taiwanese people. Because the unification council and guidelines also consider Taiwan a part of China, the decision to cease their function helps Taiwan escape from the trap of the "one China" principle. Meanwhile, this also means that it is the Taiwanese people, not the ruling elite, who have the ultimate right to decide Taiwan's future. Maintaining the status quo of Taiwan's democracy and freedom is the consensus of all Taiwanese people and it corresponds with US interests.
Needless to say, the Chinese government and the pan-blue camp were infuriated by Chen's decision. However, it seems that the US also believes Taiwan may change the status quo unilaterally. In fact, the US government seems to put much more pressure on Taiwan than China these days.
For example, the US hardly talks about China's growing military arsenal, nor the 14.7 percent increase in its military budget announced for this year. Does the US not regard this as a serious threat to the "status quo?"
If the US' idea of the "status quo" is different from that of China, namely, that Taiwan is a sovereign state instead of a part of the PRC, then the US government should clarify its interpretation unambiguously so as to avoid any misunderstanding among the main "players" on the Taiwan Strait's chessboard.
Su Yen-pin
Yonghe, Taipei County
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of