During his first visit to Asia as US president, Barack Obama issued a joint statement with Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤). References to Taiwan in the statement suggest that the situation is evolving in a direction unfavorable to the country. In view of this, the government of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) should immediately seek clarification from Washington and try to remedy the situation.
There are several points to which Taiwan should pay attention. In his speeches in Japan, Obama did not mention Taiwan at all. At his “town hall” meeting in Shanghai, he only mentioned the three US-China joint communiques and avoided the issues of China’s military threat and US arms sales. At the press conference following his meeting with Hu, although he mentioned the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) in the same sentence as the three joint communiques, he also talked about respect for China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The joint statement itself makes no mention of the TRA, while the two countries’ respect for one another’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is stated twice, as well as a wish for the two sides of the Taiwan Strait to “increase dialogues and interactions in economic, political, and other fields.”
The TRA provides the legal basis for US policy on Taiwan. Section 4 of the Act states that, despite the absence of diplomatic relations between the US and Taiwan, “Whenever the laws of the United States refer or relate to foreign countries, nations, states, governments, or similar entities, such terms shall include and such laws shall apply with such respect to Taiwan.”
This amounts to regarding Taiwan as a de facto independent state. The six assurances delivered to president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) in 1982 by then-director of the American Institute in Taiwan James Lilley on behalf of US president Ronald Reagan included the point that the US had not altered its position regarding sovereignty over Taiwan, implying that it did not recognize China’s claim of sovereignty over Taiwan. These assurances, along with the TRA, are the most important foundations for the maintenance of Taiwan-US relations.
However, the Obama-Hu joint statement says: “China emphasized that the Taiwan issue concerns China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity ... [The US and China] reiterated that the fundamental principle of respect for each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is at the core of the three US-China joint communiques which guide US-China relations. Neither side supports any attempts by any force to undermine this principle.”
The wording of the joint statement clearly departs from what is mandated by the TRA, as well as the spirit of Reagan’s six assurances. While Taiwan has in the past been viewed as a de facto sovereign independent state, the wording of the joint statement shows that its status is now being seriously challenged.
In view of this, it is very sad to see Ma happily claiming that Taiwan-US relations are better than they have been in 60 years and that mutual trust between the countries has been completely restored.
Besides, before the Obama-Hu talks, the Chinese side privately expressed the wish that the US would support dialogue across the Taiwan Strait. China wants US approval for the six points Hu proposed on the Taiwan issue on New Year’s Eve last year, which seek by hook or by crook to confine Taiwan within a “one China” framework. It wants to create an environment of cross-strait political consultation that would work in its own favor, and to reduce Taiwan’s maneuvering room.
Obviously this situation is not good for Taiwan.
The Obama-Hu talks have indeed been a big diplomatic victory for China. With regard to Taiwan, however, the Ma administration has accepted the idea of “one China.” At the same time, it is dismantling Taiwan’s strongest line of defense — its democracy. When so much has been given away, what grounds can we have for demanding that the US not accept China’s claim to sovereignty over Taiwan? Seemingly we are left with no choice but to swallow the bitter fruit of the Obama-Hu talks.
Joseph Wu is an adviser to the Taiwan Thinktank and a research fellow at the Institute of International Relations at National Chengchi University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
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