The build-up to the elections in Taiwan and the US has started much earlier than in past elections. The changes that these elections will likely bring, in addition to what is already taking place in China and the Middle East, could have an important impact on relationships in the region.
Both Taiwan and the US will hold legislative and presidential elections. Some of the prevailing policies -- including commitments made by the last two administrations -- are not likely to be retained, at least not in their present form, by whoever wins the presidential election in Taiwan.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has made the economy its primary platform, which also makes its relationship with China a central issue.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), for its part, emphasizes Taiwanese identity and makes the US its most important partner.
The two main parties will have different ideas on to cultivate the relationship with the US. At the same time, the parties are looking in two different directions on where they want Taiwan to go.
Though the US may not want to interfere with Taiwan's internal matters -- especially democratic elections -- the outcome of those elections will be important for Washington.
In addition, both political parties have more than one potential candidate for president, some of whom -- former Taipei mayor and KMT chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and President Chen Shui-bian's (
The legislative elections on Dec. 8 will determine the make-up of a legislature that is completely different from the present one -- half the current size and involving different districts. The two main parties will likely dominate, but other parties could still make some gains.
The KMT and DPP platforms are markedly different. One seeks unification with China, while the other envisions a separate country. Various efforts are being made to bring about constitutional changes on domestic matters and issues of sovereignty.
Even though a law was passed in Taiwan that was tried out , very carefully, in the last 2004 elections, some individuals in the pan-blue camp, not to mention Beijing, refuse to accept the legality of referendums.
The recent renaming of certain government institutions, with more to come, has engendered some opposition. The Taiwan Solidarity Union has often worked with the DPP on some issues, but there are now differences that likely will change the relationship.
And although James Soong's (宋楚瑜) People First Party has teamed up with the KMT for the forthcoming elections, it remains unclear how this relationship will work out.
As for the US, relations with China continue to grow and despite hedging on some issues, meetings in Beijing and Washington are becoming more frequent. Chinese officials often raise the issue of Taiwan, to which the US will likely continue to repeat its "status quo" policy without really addressing the problem.
This is part of the US's commitment in the "six assurances," -- that is, that it will not play a mediation role between Taipei and Beijing. Chinese diplomats will continue to exploit this to ensure that Washington pressures Taipei to refrain from acting unilaterally on sovereignty issues.
These issues are usually handled by the representatives in Washington and Taipei. If there are differences that require higher-level attention, one side or the other sends a special representative to discuss the matter. Given the differences within both governments on some issues, that process is not as effective as an ongoing dialogue system.
The elections of Congress and a new president in the US will come only a few months after those in Taiwan. Any change in the relationship between Washington and Taipei will be determined in the early days of the new Taiwanese government and in the midst of US elections -- not necessarily the best time for diplomatic change.
Early next year, Taiwan will have a new government. The US, however, will be dispatching personnel and developing its policies only in early 2009. An ongoing dialogue system could help smooth out political differences while each side is making its policies.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and is now a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
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