Don’t count on the US
John Copper must be aware of the clarification given by the administration of US President Barack Obama subsequent to the statement Copper disingenuously quoted regarding Taiwan as being part of China’s “core interest” (“Should the US abandon Taiwan?” June 4, page 8). Copper attempts to portray the US administration as having changed its policy toward Taiwan with respect to China from that of the previous administration.
As your lead article the same day made clear, there is no significant change (“F-16s subject to PRC sensitivities: Gates,” June 4, page 1). Both the administrations of former US president George W. Bush and Obama have been forced to be mindful of Chinese sensibilities: Bush simply chose to ignore the F-16 issue during his final term, preferring to pass the problem — and criticism — on to his successor.
It gets to the nub of an issue that has taxed contributors and correspondents to the Taipei Times during the past few months: the changing circumstances of the US’ relationship with China and Taiwan.
China is the single largest foreign holder of US government debt — US$899.5 billion, with Hong Kong holding another US$138.9 billion last year. Unlike other major foreign holders, China is not a close ally, but a competitor for influence in the region.
Moreover, to remain profitable and competitive in the global market, US corporations need Chinese manufacturing labor. Likewise, China is dependent on US markets in particular for its continued economic growth, but Beijing is reducing that dependence.
A point not quite grasped is that the US puts economic and security issues ahead of any pious sentiments regarding democracy and human rights. This explains its mixed reaction to the “Arab spring” protests of the past six months.
Only when Taiwan exercises its right to self-determination will it become truly democratic. Yet no US administration has been prepared to allow or support such a move, preventing the Taiwanese from making such a choice. Incredibly, the Bush administration opposed the holding of democratic referendums in 2004 and 2008.
Rather, at the behest of Beijing, not Taipei, since the 1970s Washington has maintained that Taiwan is part of China, and that there is only “one China.” The US is unwilling to risk war with China itself or the disruption such conflict would bring to global trade and its economy. However, for the same security reasons the US won’t tolerate Chinese military intervention across the Taiwan Strait.
While most Taiwanese may not want unification with the People’s Republic of China, they do want the so-called “status quo” between Taiwan and China. Unfortunately, this no longer exists the way it did when the US’ Taiwan Relations Act was passed in 1979. It has been rapidly undermined by several developments in the past 10 years:
First, by the growing strength and sophistication of China’s military, including submarine and anti-submarine technology. It’s a moot point whether the loss of a US aircraft carrier or fear of such a loss would force the US Navy to retire from the Taiwan Strait in the event of a conflict, but explaining such a loss to the public would at least be a tough sell for any US president and a political — if not military — disaster.
Second, Taiwan has itself become overdependent on China’s economy. In 2001, China accounted for 39 percent of Taiwan’s total outward investment, more than doubling to 84 percent by last year.
The Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) exacerbates this, not least through its “early harvest” list, by which means Taiwanese exporters and investors become even more dependent on China.
The revelation that Evergreen Marine Corp was “leaned on” by Beijing during former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) tenure in office hints at the obvious danger (“Evergreen leaned on over Chen: cable,” June 4, page 3).
Ultimately, the US is a declining regional military power, which, as it has underpinned it, impacts upon the “status quo.” These twin dynamics — military and economic — will continue to cause friction between the Washington and Beijing as they change the shape of relations. Given the broad trend in US policy toward China since the 1970s and China’s emergence as a regional power, it’s no wonder some in the US are apparently suggesting the US abandon Taiwan sooner rather than later.
PAUL DEACON
Neihu, Taipei
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,