Recently, two articles about Taiwan appeared several days apart in the Honolulu Advertiser (the largest of the two daily newspapers in Hawaii). Richard Halloran's article, "U.S. must defend Taiwan against China," appeared on July 15 (sic).
Oliver Lee's article was published on July 22, titled "U.S. likely won't defend Taiwan from China." (sic) Lee is a retired professor of the University of Hawaii's Political Science Department.
Halloran is a former New York Times correspondent and his column appears weekly in the Honolulu Advertiser Sunday's Focus section.
They hold opposite views on Taiwan's sovereignty and consequences of a forced takeover by China. Lee believes that China can rightfully takeover Taiwan by force and thinks that the US neither has the right nor the willingness to defend Taiwan in such an event. I strongly disagree on both counts. Lee barely touched upon the seriousness of the issue, not to mention the horror immediately confronting the 23 million people of this island nation, which has not been a part of China since 1895. In my view, keeping silent on Lee's assertions can be seen as agreeing with his view points.
Therefore, I submitted my views, "China cannot rightfully take Taiwan by force," to the Honolulu Advertiser and was published on Aug. 3 in its Editorial page (sic).
My rebuttal to Lee's view appears below:
Lee readily accepts that Taiwan is part of China from a historical perspective and the Shanghai Communique of 1972. If historical claims are the sole criterion then Mexico could claim the same of California and Texas. As for the communique one should ask "What is a communique worth?" Nil, except to China and those who want to take the advantage of its cheap manufacturing capacity and access to its mass market. Regarding China's claim on Taiwan, countries have used words such as "acknowledge" (US), "respects and fully understands" (Japan), "takes note," and "admits," but rarely "recognizes."
In fact, any favorable statement towards Taiwan can be extracted from developing countries in exchange for economic aid. The state of international loyalty is such that any wording in a communique can be used to gain access to China's enormous market potential. A communique exacts no international enforceability as a treaty would, even if the word "recognizes" is used. As opposed to a treaty, a communique is not rectified by referendum, congress, parliament, or a legislative body independent of the administration (Lin Yu-chong "What are communiques good for?" Taipei Times, June 25, 2005).
Experts in Taiwanese and Far Eastern affairs such as Harvey Feldman (key architect of the Taiwan Relations Act) and John Tkacik Rethinking of One China; America's Stake in Taiwan) are people in the know. They have stated clearly and repeatedly that the US has never recognized Taiwan as a part of China. The US acknowledged what China said but has never recognized it. Halloran echoed this view in a letter to the editor (July 23). The US has Congress' blessing and the law (Taiwan Relations Act) on its side to defend Taiwan. The US can ill-afford to incur the reputation of abandoning a friend when push becomes shove, a friend and an important trade and strategic partner since the end of World War II.
Since then, the US, South Korea and Japan have recognized the strategic importance of a peaceful Taiwan Strait.
An international and peaceful Taiwan Strait benefits not only the people of Taiwan, but the world at large.
Taipei Flight Information Region handles more than 1,000 civil aircrafts from various countries flying through and no less than 500 vessels navigating through the strait every single day.
China deploys a large number of missiles in the region, which seriously threatens not only Taiwan but also world commerce. It is akin to a time bomb waiting to explode at any time to threaten the peace of the entire Asian-Pacific region.
Consequently, how could the security of Taiwan and the Taiwan Strait be considered a domestic issue and not an international one? Just imagine the consequences if the strait were to suddenly become a domestic part of China if Taiwan fell.
Unthinkable! The disruption to the world economy would be enormous.
By now, it should be known throughout the world that Taiwan is an independent country in every sense of the word -- with its own defined territory, democratic system of government, passport, currency, armed forces, and all that pertains to an independent country. Foreigners confuse the totalitarian government on China (People's Republic of China) and the democratic government in Taiwan (Republic of China).
After the peaceful transfer of power to a popularly elected president in 2000, Taiwan is now a completely democratic state. Its people enjoy a wide spectrum of freedom that even Americans would envy. The Taiwanese press and mass media have enjoyed more liberty than their US counterparts, and freely criticize President Chen Shui-bian (
The world must be made safe for democracy. The road to Taiwan's democracy has been long and arduous -- military rule after World War II, 40 years of martial law and the White Terror at the hands of the KMT.
Finally, Taiwan transitioned to a full-fledged democracy in May 2000. US President George W. Bush has praised Taiwan's democracy often. Today, the 900 Chinese missiles targeting Taiwan constitute an extreme threat to the safety of the life and property of the Taiwanese people.
All the world's democratic and freedom-loving countries should have the moral courage to demand China dismantle these missiles that threaten Taiwan, the Strait and international peace.
Lin Yu-chong is professor of physiology at the University of Hawaii's John A. Burns School of Medicine.
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS