Because of Washington's troubles with Iraq, Iran and North Korea in addition to the rise of China, the US is leaning more and more toward China in the triangular relationship between the US, China and Taiwan.
It opposed Taiwan's peace referendum in 2005, ending the National Guidelines for Unification and the National Unification Council and now also the referendum on applying for UN membership using the name "Taiwan," although these were steps that furthered democratization.
The US says these referendums were attempts to unilaterally change the "status quo" across the Taiwan Strait.
A US official has even said that "Taiwan, or the Republic of China, is not at this point a state in the international community."
Under pressure from China, it could well be US concerns about China's strategic cooperation in solving the issues in North Korea, Iraq and the Middle East that forced the US to adjust its policy toward the "one China" policy framework established by the three joint communiques of China and the US.
Washington's pressure on Taiwan is based on China's bottom line.
But when we look at relations between the US, China and Taiwan, there is no real need for the US to give in to China so much. China still relies on the US for investment, open up its market and in high-tech development. Also, the actual contribution that China could make in solving the problems the US has with North Korea and Iraq is not that great.
Taiwan, on the other hand, always looks to the US for its livelihood. Now diplomatic relations between the two countries are diminishing and as soon as the US brings out its "one China" policy, there is nothing Taiwan can do.
The US of course feels that putting pressure on Taiwan is the most simple and effective way to preserve stability in the Taiwan Strait.
Can the US really afford to boss Taiwan around like this? Does it really not need Taiwan's strategically advantageous geographic position to protect its own interests?
Now that Taiwan is in a situation where it holds a lot of bargaining chips, the first thing it should do is change its diplomatic toward the US from being the weak party and nodding in agreement to everything the US says, to loudly and bravely telling the US the wrongs of its "one China" policy and poining out why this policy is not beneficial to the US.
Taiwan can point out that the "one China" policy, which the US established as a part of its strategy of getting closer to China in order to control the Soviet Union, isn't suitable anymore in the current era of globalization.
This policy is not useful in solving the conflicts between China and the US over trade and other strategic benefits that have arisen now that China is on the rise. It also isn't compatible with the "status quo" of one country on each side of the Taiwan Strait and goes completely against public opinion in Taiwan.
The two sides of the Strait aren't able to resolve their conflicting opinions as long as the US maintains its policy of keeping the issue of Taiwan's sovereignty unclear. This is the fuse that might set off the powder keg that is the situation in the Taiwan Strait, and that is the dilemma facing the US.
Moreover, Taiwan should use the problem of North Korea to improve its international circumstances and influence the upcoming presidential elections in the US. US President George W. Bush has already been reduced to a lame duck.
Taiwan should take advantage of the referendum issue to spark serious debate about the position of Taiwan in the US.
Through US organizations that sympathize with Taiwan, think tanks and the power of public opinion, the Taiwanese government should make Taiwan a major international issue during the US presidential election campaign.
It should continue to use the rich resources and experiences it has gained from its strategic geographic position, economic globalization and successful democratization.
It should urge the future leaders of the US that the best strategy for them in Asia is to correct or change their old "one China" policy.
This way, Taiwan can turn defeat into victory, and create a favorable space for Taiwan to enter the UN with the support of the US.
Michael Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
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
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,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS