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.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS