At the press conference held following the conclusion of the summit between US President George W. Bush and Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), Bush seemed to do away with conventions of the diplomatic code by talking of "disagreements" between the two leaders, rather than their having a "frank discussion," in Hu's presence. Both sides will scrutinize and dispute this very public act of causing loss of face and its significance for global relations.
This was Hu's first official visit to the US as Chinese leader, and many China experts such as Andrew Nathan and Elizabeth Economy, prior to his visit, were saying that the main purpose of his trip was to reduce US dissatisfaction with China. The major point of contention here was the US$200 billion trade deficit between the two countries, prompting Hu to send a trade mission, which signed deals worth some US$16 billion, to the US prior to his visit, as a gesture of goodwill.
When Hu first arrived in the US he took part in a conference in Seattle at which he attempted to allay US suspicions as to China's designs for the future, quoting Zheng Bijian (
In addition, on five occasions during the welcoming ceremony prior to the summit, and in the press conference after its conclusion, Hu mentioned mutual benefits with a win-win outcome. This is how he would like to color US-China relations, but his emphasis on it also betrayed the dissatisfaction he feels regarding those relations as they stand. He has publicly said that he wants to see mutual respect and equal treatment between the two countries, and also opened his address during the welcoming ceremony with a reference to the opening chapter of China-US trade relations, when US merchant ships arrived off the Chinese coast in 1784.
Hu declined to make any concrete promises on Bush's demands of reducing the trade deficit, letting the yuan appreciate against the US dollar and improving China's record on human rights and religious freedoms. Bush was able neither to improve his own domestic approval ratings nor alleviate pressure from Congress as a result of Hu's visit, and the pressure Hu exerted on Bush to "oppose" Taiwanese independence also came to no avail, with Hu having to settle for Bush reiterating that he "did not support" it. All of the above meant that there was little improvement in China-US relations, and that Hu failed to achieve his goals for the trip.
There was, however, a subtle shift in the relations between the two countries. The Bush administration has, on many occasions, asked Beijing to enter into talks with Taipei to reduce tension across the Taiwan Strait, ever since China passed its so-called "Anti-Secession" Law in March last year, a move the US regarded as a unilateral change to the status quo. All Beijing has done, however, is increase contact with the Taiwanese public and opposition parties, treating the government itself as a non-entity.
During this summit, Bush made no demands for the two sides to engage in dialogue: This is very likely the result of the recent trip to the US of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
With the Taiwanese government being marginalized by the US as well, it is unlikely that cross-strait relations will improve, but it is unlikely they will deteriorate, either. After this summit, Beijing knows that Bush's patience with Taipei has grown thin. During the recent meeting between Ma and President Chen Shui-bian (
With the US clearly not supporting Taiwanese independence, Beijing no longer concerned that the US will covertly support any moves to independence by the Chen government, and Chen himself powerless to make such moves, neither China, the US nor Taiwan are likely to change the situation in the Taiwan Strait. Now that both China and Washington have marginalized Taipei, the situation has become, in the short term, more stable.
Emerson Chang is director of the Department of International Studies at Nan Hua University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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
RSS