On Nov. 16, the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission's annual report was released to Congress and the public. The report had a broad mandate -- to "evaluate how the US relationship with China affects the economic health of the US and its industrial base, the military and weapons proliferation dangers China poses to the US, and the US political standing and influence in Asia."
All of these issues are of as much interest to Taiwan as they are to the US.
For the most part, however, the Taiwanese media has focused on one element of the report's recommendations -- that the administration of US President George W. Bush should implement a long-term policy to assist Taiwan's participation in the international community.
There is a connection, of course.
The commission is a nonpartisan organization established by Congress. Its basic concern, especially after the Congressional elections, is that the economic relationship with China could change dramatically.
The huge amount of production that has shifted to China from the US has already begun to impact seriously on producers, services and buyers in the US.
Doubtless there are economists who may not agree. Within the executive branch, there is usually little support for strategic assessments developed by Congress.
In fact, a large group of Cabinet officials headed by the treasury secretary will be going to China to press for change in many of China's economic policies.
Their effort may push through some important policy changes, but that is unlikely to be enough. It also does not include security issues and regional political matters.
In its relationship with the US, Taiwan is already well aware that there are times when economic policies will clash with security and political policies.
Such a situation -- in the US and Taiwan -- is likely to have domestic political repercussions.
In addition, one of the commission's recommendations was to help Taiwan expand its international activities. The US abides by the Three Communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA).
The TRA, Section 4, Part D, states that "Nothing in this act may be construed as a basis for supporting the exclusion or expulsion of Taiwan from continued membership in any international financial institution or any other international organization."
Unfortunately, in the days when the US had far more power in the international community, this commitment was not strongly pursued.
More recently, the best the US can do is rally other friendly states to help it, though increasingly even that has become unlikely. With China's rise, the problem has become more China's ability to constrain Taiwan's international participation.
So implementing a long-term policy to facilitate Taiwan's participation in international organizations, as the commission's recommendation suggests, may be a bit late. Perhaps. It depends on the future character of the US-China relationship.
A sharp downturn in China's rise could be caused by any number of domestic problems: water, oil consumption, environmental degradation and the impact of high tech opening, among others.
According to the commission, in addition to the US' concerns about the impact on the US economy of the migration of production to China, there is also the problem of China's military buildup and the implications that this has on US strategic interest in the Pacific.
While both the US and China ponder the impact of their interdependence on bilateral diplomacy, they are both keeping an eye on Taiwan's internal changes.
There will be a new Taiwanese administration in about a year and a half, and the two major parties both seem determined to follow what are increasingly different objectives.
Beijing will continue to seek Taiwan's unification with China. How that can be done depends on which of Taiwan's two main political parties is in power.
US policy likewise will depend on this. Taiwan could accept being part of China, on one hand, or move toward full de jure independence. Either option will have an impact on US regional priorities.
One would assume that if it is the former, US policy toward Taiwan might be more similar to policy toward China.
If it is the latter, making a greater effort to support some form of Taiwanese participation in the international community might be given more effort.
But I suspect that the pursuit of that goal will be given much the same amount of attention as it is now.
One other possibility is a greater effort at supporting Taiwan in working with others to promote democracy.
There seems, in some circles, to be more interest than in the past in emphasizing the advantages of Singapore's ASEAN values system, or even Hong Kong's "one country, two systems" formula, as a step toward democracy.
Taiwan, with its democracy, is in a unique position to challenge those views. It is difficult to hide Taiwan's example in the Internet age.
While the government of China filters what is happening in Taiwan, the people there are well aware of how the Taiwanese are dealing with corruption and the laws of a real democracy. In any event, the US in some way should support pro-democracy activities.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS