The US government has made it clear that it will not back Taiwan's plan to apply for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan." On the diplomatic front, the major obstacle facing Taiwan is the US' adherence to the "one China" policy. Unfortunately, during the recent televised debate between the four Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential hopefuls, none of them pointed out how inappropriate the "one China" policy is or came up with a clear and comprehensive diplomatic strategy for Taiwan to gain international recognition.
I believe that Taiwan's diplomatic strategy towards the US should stress its core values and adhere to the principles of reciprocity and coexistence in urging the US to revise its outdated "one China" policy, while letting the US understand that whatever Taiwan does will benefit the US.
Taiwan should begin by accentuating its democratic achievements and its geopolitical and economic strategic value.
Taiwan and China share a linguistic and cultural background. Taiwan's democratic experience is the most important example for leading China down the path to democracy. As democracy deepens, the Taiwanese people are developing an increasingly strong awareness of Taiwan's independence and sovereignty, and the US government's antiquated "one China" policy only hurts the future development of cross-strait relations. This will have an impact on Washington's ultimate goal of a peaceful transformation of China.
Second, Taiwan enjoys a unique strategic geopolitical position in the Asia Pacific region and it supports the US-Japan alliance which will stop China, a continental nation, from expanding its naval capabilities. However, if the US continues to abide by its "one China" policy, Taiwan will not be able to exert its geopolitical advantage, thereby allowing the already powerful China to engage in maritime expansion.
Third, Taiwan outshines China in management, integration of mid and downstream industries and research and development. In addition, China's exports to the US are mostly made by China-based Taiwanese companies, so if Washington refuses to adjust its "one China" policy, it will in the end be restricted by China's giving precedence to politics over the economy when dealing with Taiwan.
Taiwan should then take aim at Washington's cross-strait policy and Taiwan's democracy.
First, the objective of US cross-strait policy is to help the two sides of the Taiwan Strait to settle their differences peacefully. However, Beijing is making every effort to block Taiwan in the international arena. If the US does not want to adjust its "one China" policy and help Taiwan join important international organizations, there will be no room for cross-strait negotiations on an equal footing.
Second, the circumstances when the US first formulated its "one China" policy were very different from today's growing Taiwanese consciousness. By adopting a policy that obscures Taiwan's sovereignty, the US will not be able to help Taipei and Beijing settle their differences.
Third, the US' China-leaning cross-strait policy has not only violated the basic rights of the citizens of Taiwan to purse their freedom, democracy and happiness, but it has also violated the founding spirit of the US and the administration of US President George W. Bush's policy of seeking global democratization.
Faced with a difficult situation, Taiwan must make good use of its resources, construct a discourse that best tallies with US interests and come up with a strategy aimed at closing the gap between ideals and reality. Only by doing so can we bring the international community to recognize Taiwan as a sovereign state and eventually join the WHO and the UN. Therefore, it is about time that our national leaders said no to the US' "one China" policy.
Michael Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Daniel Cheng
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,