Former vice president Lien Chan (連戰) met Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) at the APEC leaders’ summit in Lima on Friday. APEC is one of a handful of international bodies of which Taiwan is an official member and this was the first time such senior Taiwanese and Chinese leaders met at one of its summits. The meeting was symbolic for both sides, but nothing more than that.
Although the meeting was an indication of reduced cross-strait tension, Taiwan should not rush to celebrate. In no way does it mean that China is willing to recognize Taiwan’s sovereignty, or that Taiwan can now deal with China on an equal footing internationally. Beijing’s leadership saw the meeting as one between friends that had nothing to do with Taiwan’s international status.
China’s treatment of the Lien-Hu meeting was molded by political considerations. Although the meeting took place at the APEC summit, the arrangements differed from the bilateral meetings between leaders of other APEC members. Xinhua news agency, for example, never once mentioned Hu’s status as Chinese president, referring to him instead as Chinese Communist Party general secretary, while Lien was called honorary chairman of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), thereby avoiding portraying the meeting as one between China’s president and the representative of Taiwan’s top leader. China’s foreign minister did not accompany Hu for the Lien meeting. Instead, Wang Yi (王毅), head of the Taiwan Affairs Office, was flown over, to emphasize that it was a party-to-party, not a state-to-state meeting.
Both Lien and Hu described the meeting as one between old friends. Speaking of Hu in flattering terms, Lien scarcely mentioned the things Taiwanese really want from China — peace, equality, dignity and prosperity. Nothing important was discussed and the meeting served no practical purpose.
Although US President George W. Bush is a lame duck leader, he is still the head of a great power. Diplomacy therefore required that he hold a bilateral meeting with Hu. The two did not depart from the standpoints they have held at past meetings. Hu reminded Bush that the Taiwan question is a vital matter for Beijing and remains the most important and sensitive aspect of China-US relations. He also stressed that his government would never depart from its “one China” stance. Bush reiterated that the US maintains a “one China” policy guided by the Taiwan Relations Act and the three US-China joint declarations. He also urged China to talk to the Dalai Lama, and once more expressed his commitment to religious freedom. Although there are many issues on which Bush and Hu do not formally agree, at least they are willing to exchange views and expound their positions on an equal footing.
No great practical results were to be expected from Hu’s meetings with either Lien or Bush, but his meeting with Bush was a dialog between equals, while that with Lien was an exercise in control through conciliation. Although the Lima summit was the first at which Taiwan has been represented by such a senior figure as a former vice president, and although he managed to meet the Chinese president, this shows only that China is taking a more flexible approach in its dealings with Taiwan. It does not signify any change in Beijing’s “one China” policy. Taiwan should not allow the APEC meeting to lull it into a false sense of security.
A chip made by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) was found on a Huawei Technologies Co artificial intelligence (AI) processor, indicating a possible breach of US export restrictions that have been in place since 2019 on sensitive tech to the Chinese firm and others. The incident has triggered significant concern in the IT industry, as it appears that proxy buyers are acting on behalf of restricted Chinese companies to bypass the US rules, which are intended to protect its national security. Canada-based research firm TechInsights conducted a die analysis of the Huawei Ascend 910B AI Trainer, releasing its findings on Oct.
Pat Gelsinger took the reins as Intel CEO three years ago with hopes of reviving the US industrial icon. He soon made a big mistake. Intel had a sweet deal going with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), the giant manufacturer of semiconductors for other companies. TSMC would make chips that Intel designed, but could not produce and was offering deep discounts to Intel, four people with knowledge of the agreement said. Instead of nurturing the relationship, Gelsinger — who hoped to restore Intel’s own manufacturing prowess — offended TSMC by calling out Taiwan’s precarious relations with China. “You don’t want all of
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.
In a recent essay in Foreign Affairs, titled “The Upside on Uncertainty in Taiwan,” Johns Hopkins University professor James B. Steinberg makes the argument that the concept of strategic ambiguity has kept a tenuous peace across the Taiwan Strait. In his piece, Steinberg is primarily countering the arguments of Tufts University professor Sulmaan Wasif Khan, who in his thought-provoking new book The Struggle for Taiwan does some excellent out-of-the-box thinking looking at US policy toward Taiwan from 1943 on, and doing some fascinating “what if?” exercises. Reading through Steinberg’s comments, and just starting to read Khan’s book, we could already sense that