The current US race for the White House is different from earlier races in many respects. Even a basic difference such as implementing a new political calendar impacts the race.
Nevada's caucus is now scheduled just after the Iowa caucus and ahead of the New Hampshire primary. Many other states are planning to move forward their primaries.
As of mid-March, eight states, including California and New Jersey, have moved their primary elections to next Feb. 5.
Fourteen other states, including Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania and Texas, are proposing to move their primaries to the same date. So some 50 percent of the delegates could be chosen by Feb. 5, narrowing the field down to a few strong candidates.
There are large numbers of declared or presumed candidates in both parties. Their main efforts now are fund raising and assembling a competent campaign staff. Because of the large amount of money required to run a serious campaign, some fringe candidates are expected to withdraw early. Others may stumble by saying the wrong thing or failing to ignite support among voters.
According to an average of seven national polls in February of likely Republican voters, former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani led with 40 percent, followed by 22 percent for Senator John McCain, 11 percent for former speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and 7 percent for former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.
McCain is nevertheless regarded as the front-runner by virtue of his campaign team, fund-raising resources and experience in the US Congress and military. However, his strong support for the Iraq War is a sharp departure from voter sentiment. At 70, his age could also be a negative factor.
There are also a few other Republican hopefuls.
There are also many contenders on the Democratic side. New York Senator Hillary Clinton, the former first lady, has a substantial lead over her Democrat rivals. According to a recent survey conducted by the Washington Post and ABC News, 36 percent of Democrats support Clinton, 24 percent back Illinois Senator Barack Obama, 14 percent support the party's 2000 nominee, former vice president Al Gore, and 12 percent endorse John Edwards, the party's vice presidential nominee in 2004.
Clinton's advantages include name recognition, fund-raising prowess and a reputation for sharp intelligence. Possible liabilities are the perception that she is polarizing, may not be electable partly because of "Clinton fatigue," perceived relatively poor oratory skills, and consistent support of the Iraq War -- although she has been adjusting her stance on how and when US forces may be withdrawn from Iraq.
Obama is an attractive fresh face. He is articulate and comes across as someone genuinely committed to doing good for the country. He is an excellent speaker and author of two best-selling books who could draw considerable Black-American support away from the Clinton camp. He also objected to the Iraq War when it was politically risky to do so. The concern is his lack of experience. He has been in the US Senate for only two years.
Edwards has cultivated good relations with workers unions across the country. He is deeply committed to eliminating poverty and has traveled extensively overseas since 2004 to broaden his horizons. He is talented and is already developing policy proposals such as a comprehensive healthcare coverage plan. He could be a viable contender, depending on the progress of the Iraq War, the state of the economy and other unforeseen developments. On March 22, Edwards announced in a press conference that his wife Elizabeth's cancer had returned, but the campaign would continue.
The polls cited above may not be reliable since at this early stage: The results primarily reflect name recognition. As the long campaign progresses, voter preferences will undoubtedly shift.
A new poll conducted by the Los Angeles Times from Feb. 13 to Feb. 26 of 313 members of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and 133 members of the Republican National Committee (RNC) showed quite different results.
Among Democrats, Clinton won 20 percent of the support, Edwards 15 percent, Obama 11 percent, Gore 10 percent and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson 9 percent.
Among Republicans, Romney won 20 percent, Giuliani 14 percent, McCain 10 percent and Gingrich 8 percent.
Since the DNC and RNC members are delegates to the national nominating conventions, key organizers and opinion leaders, this insider poll possibly provides a more accurate reading of each candidate's party support.
Because of the Iraq fiasco and numerous scandals under the current administration, such as the Katrina relief failure, the perjury conviction of Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff Scooter Libby, the callous treatment of wounded soldiers at Walter Reed Medical Center, and the newly emerging controversy about the politically motivated firing of eight US attorneys by the Justice Department, there is a desire among independent voters to kick the rascals out. This inclination for change will favor the Democratic nominee.
This is not good news for Taiwan, since Democrats tend to see China as an economic challenge rather than a military threat. However, Taiwan's strategic value as an example of democracy for China and as a bastion against China's expansionist ambitions will dictate US policy no matter which party wins the White House.
The next US president will undoubtedly inherit the thorny problems of the Middle East and will have little time to pay attention to developments in Taiwan.
Concerns about Taiwan's future have prompted many Taiwanese-Americans and Taiwanese-American organizations to lobby the US government to ensure Taiwan's survival as a democratic state free from China's control. Such efforts have concentrated on the US Congress.
In reality, foreign policy is initiated and implemented by the president with support from the National Security Council, the State Department, the Pentagon and other executive agencies.
The congressional role to advise and consent is secondary. Whoever wins the race to the White House will have the greatest say about US policy towards Taiwan, China and East Asia in general. So it is important to pay attention to the ongoing presidential election, even though the first primary is ten months away.
Taiwanese-Americans need to monitor the evolving presidential race and try to approach the campaign staffs of the major contenders in each party, even though policy formulation is not the immediate concern of the candidates.
Once the candidates are nominated by their party convention, it will be much more difficult to approach their foreign policy aides. The objective is to provide useful information regarding US policy toward Taiwan, China and East Asia from the perspective of US citizens' interested in advancing US interests in the Asia-Pacific region. Such efforts could conceivably influence the drafting of party platforms in the summer before the presidential election.
Another goal is to help prevent the emergence of policy positions detrimental to the interest of both the US and Taiwan, such as John Kerry's advocacy of "one country two systems" for Taiwan's future in 2004.
Taiwan will have a new president in May next year. The new administration will need to maintain solid relations with the administration of US president George W. Bush while keeping a watchful eye on the US presidential election, the outcome of which will be known in November next year, with the new president inaugurated in January 2009.
The distraction of the protracted presidential race in the US means that Taiwan should be vigilant in bolstering its national defense and economic security in order to safeguard the nation's hard-won freedom.
Li Thian-hok is a freelance political commentator based in Pennsylvania.
A return to power for former US president Donald Trump would pose grave risks to Taiwan’s security, autonomy and the broader stability of the Indo-Pacific region. The stakes have never been higher as China aggressively escalates its pressure on Taiwan, deploying economic, military and psychological tactics aimed at subjugating the nation under Beijing’s control. The US has long acted as Taiwan’s foremost security partner, a bulwark against Chinese expansionism in the region. However, a second Trump presidency could upend decades of US commitments, introducing unpredictability that could embolden Beijing and severely compromise Taiwan’s position. While president, Trump’s foreign policy reflected a transactional
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has prioritized modernizing the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to rival the US military, with many experts believing he would not act on Taiwan until the PLA is fully prepared to confront US forces. At the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th Party Congress in 2022, Xi emphasized accelerating this modernization, setting 2027 — the PLA’s centennial — as the new target, replacing the previous 2035 goal. US intelligence agencies said that Xi has directed the PLA to be ready for a potential invasion of Taiwan by 2027, although no decision on launching an attack had been made. Whether
A chip made by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) was found on a Huawei Technologies Co artificial intelligence (AI) processor, indicating a possible breach of US export restrictions that have been in place since 2019 on sensitive tech to the Chinese firm and others. The incident has triggered significant concern in the IT industry, as it appears that proxy buyers are acting on behalf of restricted Chinese companies to bypass the US rules, which are intended to protect its national security. Canada-based research firm TechInsights conducted a die analysis of the Huawei Ascend 910B AI Trainer, releasing its findings on Oct.
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.