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.
US aerospace company Boeing Co has in recent years been involved in numerous safety incidents, including crashes of its 737 Max airliners, which have caused widespread concern about the company’s safety record. It has recently come to light that titanium jet engine parts used by Boeing and its European competitor Airbus SE were sold with falsified documentation. The source of the titanium used in these parts has been traced back to an unknown Chinese company. It is clear that China is trying to sneak questionable titanium materials into the supply chain and use any ensuing problems as an opportunity to
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
Delegation-level visits between the two countries have become an integral part of transformed relations between India and the US. Therefore, the visit by a bipartisan group of seven US lawmakers, led by US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul to India from June 16 to Thursday last week would have largely gone unnoticed in India and abroad. However, the US delegation’s four-day visit to India assumed huge importance this time, because of the meeting between the US lawmakers and the Dalai Lama. This in turn brings us to the focal question: How and to what extent