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
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS