The US broke its silence on relations with Taiwan when US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice held a press conference stressing that Washington has a strong relationship with Taiwan. This seemed to imply that the US is trying to keep Taiwan’s government from giving up its relationship with the US in exchange for closer ties with China.
Derek Mitchell, an expert in Asian security with the International Security Program (ISP) of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, has said that in terms of future cross-strait relations, China has a much greater responsibility than Taiwan. Mitchell also encouraged President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to speak out against Beijing’s stance on US military sales to Taiwan.
However, the US government still has not taken any substantial action to help Taiwan. On March 25, Douglas Spelman, director of the Taiwan section of the US State Department’s Bureau of East Asia and Pacific Affairs, said he had five hopes for the Taiwan Strait, all of which were aimed at encouraging dialogue between China and Taiwan. On the other hand, Ma has been trying hard to get close to China and there have been reports that he has mentioned canceling military purchases from the US.
Apart from problems with Ma’s personality, this issue is complicated by his being forced by those within the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) with vested interests in China. If the US does not get involved very soon, safety and stability across the Taiwan Strait will be jeopardized.
The 23 million people of Taiwan share common ideals with the US, and relations between the two nations are stable. The 58th anniversary of the start of the Korean War passed a few days ago. In that war Taiwan and the US fought together to resist the spread of communism in East Asia. So, it is not only the responsibility, but also in the best interests, of the US to support Taiwan’s moves toward further democratization.
The US should help Taiwan in the following ways:
First, US President George W. Bush and Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) spoke with each other via telephone on March 26. In the English transcript of the conversation released by Xinhua news agency, Hu promised to accept the formulation that there is “one China with each side having its own interpretation.” However, in the Chinese transcript, this sentence was changed to “one China.” The US should ask Beijing to make the truth known and clarify the details of the conversation.
It should also be made clear that “one China with each side having its own interpretation” is the bare minimum that Taiwan will accept in terms of sovereignty and that without sovereignty there can be no equality between Taiwan and China. Without sovereignty and equality, Taiwan will not be secure, nor will the Taiwan Strait be stable.
Second, the US should recommence military sales to Taiwan as soon as possible to help maintain Taiwan’s national security. China has nothing to do with whether military sales stay frozen or not, this is simply a matter of US policy. However, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on June 12 urged the US to permanently stop weapon sales to Taiwan. This was an attempt to damage the “status quo” and challenge US policy on the Taiwan Strait.
Third, before his election, Ma promised that Taiwan’s future would be decided by the 23 million people of Taiwan. Since winning the election, however, he has not dared utter a single word on the matter. Regardless of whether the Republicans or the Democrats win the US presidential election, both parties have made it clear that Taiwan’s future must be acceptable to the Taiwanese people and that their wishes be respected. This is in line with the spirit of a nation founded on human rights like the US.
Therefore, in case Ma does not mention this issue, the US can bring this up with China on Taiwan’s behalf.
Hu has been trying to win favor with Japan lately, with China even being willing to concede its rights to oil fields in the East China Sea to Japan. This maneuver is in fact a small short-term sacrifice aimed at gaining greater long-term advantages. China’s long-term goal is to establish an international “united anti-US front.” This is because the US is a formidable enemy that China must try to isolate internationally.
China’s goal is to disrupt Taiwan-Japan relations. It is also trying to undermine the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the US and Japan. This intention is evident from China’s decision to appoint former ambassador to Japan Wang Yi (王毅) as director of the Taiwan Affairs Office. Therefore, the US must do something to improve its relations with Taiwan to ensure security in East Asia.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in Taiwan.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
The 75th anniversary summit of NATO was held in Washington from Tuesday to Thursday last week. Its main focus was the reinvigoration and revitalization of NATO, along with its expansion. The shadow of domestic electoral politics could not be avoided. The focus was on whether US President Biden would deliver his speech at the NATO summit cogently. Biden’s fitness to run in the next US presidential election in November was under assessment. NATO is acquiring more coherence and teeth. These were perhaps more evident than Biden’s future. The link to the Biden candidacy is critical for NATO. If Biden loses
Shortly after Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) stepped down as general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 2012, his successor, Xi Jinping (習近平), articulated the “Chinese Dream,” which aims to rejuvenate the nation and restore its historical glory. While defense analysts and media often focus on China’s potential conflict with Taiwan, achieving “rejuvenation” would require Beijing to engage in at least six different conflicts with at least eight countries. These include territories ranging from the South China Sea and East China Sea to Inner Asia, the Himalayas and lands lost to Russia. Conflicts would involve Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia,
The Sino-Indian border dispute remains one of the most complex and enduring border issues in the world. Unlike China’s borders with Russia and Vietnam, which have seen conflicts, but eventually led to settled agreements, the border with India, particularly the region of Arunachal Pradesh, remains a point of contention. This op-ed explores the historical and geopolitical nuances that contribute to this unresolved border dispute. The crux of the Sino-Indian border dispute lies in the differing interpretations of historical boundaries. The McMahon Line, established by the 1914 Simla Convention, was accepted by British India and Tibet, but never recognized by China, which
The Constitutional Court on Wednesday last week held a preparatory hearing for an injunction request to halt the enforcement of controversial new amendments to government oversight laws. Constitutional Court oral arguments are scheduled for Aug. 6 on the constitutionality of amendments to the Act Governing the Legislative Yuan’s Power (立法院職權行使法) and the Criminal Code, which were passed on May 28 by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) lawmakers. The amendments were signed into law on June 24 and promulgated on June 26. However, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative caucus, the Executive Yuan, President William Lai (賴清德) and the Control