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
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
RSS