Several US academics have argued in recent articles that the US should distance itself from Taiwan because China’s power and influence are rising and it would become more “costly” for the US to maintain close ties with Taipei, and in particular maintain its defense obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act.
Charles Glaser of George Washington University argued along those lines in a recent article in Foreign Affairs, while Bob Sutter, also of GWU, recently painted an equally gloomy picture, saying that the rise of China is giving Beijing leverage over Taiwan, and in light of Taiwan’s weakening positions in economic and military strength and the diplomatic front, the status quo is becoming unsustainable and Taiwan has very limited options for its future and unification with China is deemed inevitable.
The academics seem to make two assumptions: first, that the rise of China is unstoppable and the US needs to adjust its policy to accommodate Beijing’s increasing influence on the international stage; and second, that given China’s economic and military power, Chinese annexation of Taiwan is a foregone conclusion.
Neither of these assumptions takes account of the most important reason for US support for Taiwan — that Taiwan is a democracy and that China is still ruled by an authoritarian regime. If the US wants democracy to prevail in East Asia, it needs to be more assertive in its support for a democratic nation like Taiwan.
If the US wants China to become democratic, it needs to maintain a vibrant democracy on its doorstep. Right under the surface in China, people are clearly longing for a more free and open political system. Hundreds of human rights activists are languishing in prison, including Nobel Laureate Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波). In recent months, China has, in an effort to prevent anything similar to the revolutions spreading across the Arab world, intensified repressive measures and arrested and imprisoned more human rights activists, journalists, Internet bloggers and artists.
The basic conclusion is that China will not become democratic if the US gives up on Taiwan. However, the scenario of Taiwan’s eventual unification with China is also totally out of step with the aspirations of Taiwanese. A recent opinion poll conducted by the Global Views survey center showed that nearly 70 percent of respondents rejected unification with China, and given a free choice, would opt for independence.
At this point, the people of Taiwan can still say what they want, in spite of China’s military threat and intimidation. In less than eight months, on Jan. 14, Taiwanese are going to the polls to elect a new president.
The choice is clear: the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has maneuvered Taiwan into closer orbit with China, while the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) wants to retain Taiwan’s freedom and democracy, and — if elected — would steer the nation toward a more balanced policy, seeking closer cooperation with the US and other democracies like Japan.
Taiwan is at a critical juncture in its history. Recent opinion polls have shown that DPP presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), the first female presidential candidate in the history of Taiwan, is in a good position to win the presidency. In a recent Forbes article, she was described as a pathfinder and a creative thinker who has proposed practical and moderate approaches to dealing with China.
Instead of distancing itself from this budding democracy, the US should be more supportive of democracy in Taiwan and respect the aspirations of Taiwanese to continue to live in freedom and democracy.
Chen Mei-chin is a commentator in Washington.
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