Taiwan may not have official diplomatic ties with the US, but this shouldn't mean that Taiwan's president, or his successor next year, should be treated with any less respect by US officials.
A quick assessment of American Institute in Taiwan Chairman Raymond Burghardt's comments during his visit to Taipei this week demonstrates that the US government still has much to learn about showing respect to the president of a democracy.
Burghardt regurgitated Washington's opposition to the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) referendum on joining the UN under the name "Taiwan" and expressed the US administration's concerns over the consequences of a successful referendum for cross-strait stability during his meeting with President Chen Shui-bian (
After telling local reporters on Monday that "all it [the referendum] does is cause trouble," Burghardt -- in an overtly condescending manner -- told Chen that what the latter had said and done with the referendum could "harm the new president's ability to get off on the right foot." He added that the referendum would not only make things difficult for the next president but make things even more complicated if it passes.
Just because Taiwan lacks official diplomatic ties with the US and is not recognized as a state by the UN does not give Burghardt license to lecture Chen on what he should and should not do, nor draw red lines for the next president on how he should proceed on cross-strait policy.
Even if the referendum does pass in January it would only be a reflection of the people's will to see Taiwan join the UN under the name "Taiwan." One therefore wonders why it should be so offensive for a president to follow the will of the people who elected him.
Burghardt said the result of the referendum would not change Washington's "one China" policy. That's fine, for Taiwan is an independent state with its own territory and currency and a government that is answerable only to Taiwanese.
The referendum is not an attempt to influence US policy.
The US government has often complained about Chen springing surprises on Washington by making sudden announcements and that the DPP administration has failed to understand US policy. Granted, Chen has a tendency to make extemporary remarks that warrant more care.
But beyond that, the lack of official diplomatic links -- and the calisthenics that this situation has forced Taiwanese diplomats to perform just to talk to their US counterparts -- is the principal reason why Taipei hasn't been able to "get" US policy. Give us direct access and all that ambiguity, all those misunderstandings, will vanish.
Taiwan cherishes and takes very seriously its relationship with the US.
But by the same token, the US should respect Taiwan and let its elected president do his job -- represent Taiwanese and work for their collective good.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
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
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
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,
RSS