While the administration of US President George W. Bush has officially objected to the administration of President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) using the name "Taiwan" to apply for UN membership this year, calling it a move to unilaterally change the cross-strait "status quo," Washington seems to be overlooking measures by Beijing to wage diplomatic warfare against Taiwan's participation in the international arena.
Recently, China introduced a series of moves in some international organizations to identify Taiwan as part of its territory. For example, in the World Organization for Animal Health's latest resolution on affirming adherence to the so-called "one China policy," it "notes" China's view that "the government of the People's Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole of China, which includes Taiwan."
While some analysts from Washington see Chen's push toward explicit Taiwanese independence through implementing a referendum, introducing a new constitution and recently articulating the so-called "four imperatives and one non-issue," Beijing's diplomatic maneuverings to exclude Taiwan's participation and legal representation in international organizations deserves more attention.
The official US position toward Taiwan and China is to oppose unilateral change to the "status quo," although US officials ordinarily use the phrase only after the Taiwanese government has acted in a manner perceived to be aggravating China.
Only until recently, Richard Lawless, US deputy assistant secretary of defense for East Asia and the Pacific, publicly accused China of changing the "status quo" in the Taiwan Strait through its rapid buildup of a ballistic missiles aimed at Taiwan. In addition to his predecessor Peter Rodman's accusation that China violated the "status quo" last year, Lawless is the first US official to confirm Beijing's military expansion has "changed" the cross-strait "status quo."
Not only have those two statements illustrated the complicated nature of US-Taiwan relations, they have also demonstrated an essential need for leaders of both Washington and Taipei to engage in a more candid, cooperative and constructive dialogue in the next nine months prior to Taiwan's presidential election.
Some analysts have emphasized that since the Bush administration is preoccupied with North Korea and Iraq, Taiwan should remain quiet and refrain from giving Beijing reasons to pressure the US over Taiwan policy.
But even if Taiwan plays the good kid, to what extent has Washington successfully urged Beijing to give more space to Taipei on the playground?
Bush's recent speech in Prague earlier this month serves as an example for Taipei and Washington to rethink their bilateral relationship. Elaborating on his idea of expanding democracy and freedom to the world, Bush cited South Korea and Taiwan as examples that prove the US can maintain friendships while simultaneously pushing those nations toward democracy.
If Bush and his administration are serious about this, they should cherish Taiwan's democracy by showing more support for Taiwan in the international arena. The Taiwanese government's attempts to safeguard its sovereignty in the face of China's constant attempts at international isolation and military intimidation should be viewed as a model democracy counteracting authoritarian suppression. Who more than Taiwan deserves the promise behind Bush's strategy of "seeking and supporting the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation?"
The US-Taiwan relationship could benefit from following such a strategy.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
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,