The first meeting between Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) and US President Barack Obama at this year’s G20 summit was brief, but they agreed to hold a meeting in Washington this summer that would include detailed discussions on Taiwan.
Two to three days of detailed discussion on Taiwan would have important implications. Given the current chaotic state of affairs, those familiar with the cross-strait situation worry that great changes could be in the making. Would such changes be beneficial for Taiwan? Will Taiwan’s democracy and human rights remain in place?
The Taiwanese public’s concerns are not baseless. A look at the later stages of George W. Bush’s presidency and the current administration shows that the presidents, the departments of state and defense and even the American Institute in Taiwan have ignored the possibility that President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) rapid turn toward China may destroy the East Asian order — and they are even applauding him.
By comparison, former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) attempted to match their policies to the policy goals of democracy and human rights in the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), and they acted in accordance with the guidelines for protecting Taiwan agreed to by the US-Japan alliance. Despite this, the US condemned Lee’s “special state-to-state” dictum and Chen’s referendums. This blatant difference in treatment is incomprehensible.
This year marks the 30th anniversary of the passage of the TRA. In 1979, the US recognized the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the legitimate representative of China. Looking back another 30 years, we discover that 1949 was the year the PRC was established and the year the Republic of China moved into exile in Taiwan.
The years 1949, 1979 and 2009 represent turning points in the dialogue between the US, China and Taiwan. They also manifest how Taiwan is bound by the China issue as it seeks to have its status determined.
At this crucial time, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been lucky to gain a leader with practical and academic experience in Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文); there are hopes that she will use her expertise in international affairs to handle multifaceted matters within the party, within Taiwan, across the Taiwan Strait, in East Asia and internationally, and reshape the closed, uniform discourse of the past. There are also hopes that she will elevate the pro-Taiwan faction from the level of instinctive grassroots protest to one of leadership and policy direction.
But the last few months have shown that Tsai is following past practice. She showed no concern for the case Roger C.S. Lin et al vs United States of America, an important legal case on the definition of Taiwan’s international status. This, despite the fact that the verdict said the issue could have been addressed in terms favorable to Taiwan if it hadn’t been a political matter and if judicial self-restraint hadn’t demanded a separation of powers. Such lack of concern will hurt the DPP’s ability to set the political agenda.
Tsai did not join Japan in opposing North Korea’s rocket tests. Such silence will not help Taiwan’s attempts to cultivate friendships. Nor has she cited the interests of the US, Japan and other nations when debating the economic cooperation framework agreement. Such omissions will only result in Taiwan fighting China all on its own.
A leader should look past appearances and be aware of the potential for change that occurs every few decades, as well as be able to follow her own path and avoid traps.
I place my hope in the DPP and Tsai but write this to remind them of what needs to be done.
HoonTing is a Taiwan-based freelance writer.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
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