It is a bit peculiar to see that suddenly so many US government officials are visiting Taiwan these days. During the past few weeks, there was US Deputy Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman. The week before that it was USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah, while in September US Assistant Secretary of Commerce Suresh Kumar visited Taipei. And earlier in the year, US Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing Sandra Henriquez swung by.
One observer stated that there have been more US high-level visits during the past three months than in the previous three years. Is US President Barack Obama’s administration suddenly becoming responsive to repeated suggestions from the US Congress to pay more attention to Taiwan and to have a better dialogue with the nation?
Perhaps so, but some critical minds have also voiced a concern that the Obama administration is implicitly taking sides in Taiwan’s presidential election next month and by sending in one senior official after another, is showing undue preference for the present government in Taipei. This would indeed be a contravention of the stated policy of the US.
At a US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs hearing in October, US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Kurt Campbell said: “We, as Americans, are excited about this [election] process because it highlights one of the key values that we share with the people on Taiwan. We do not believe any one party or leader on Taiwan has a monopoly on effective management of the relationship and we do not take sides in the elections. We will work closely with whatever leadership emerges from Taiwan’s free and fair elections to build on our enduring commitment to Taiwan’s people, its prosperity and peace.”
There are other points where the US needs to be very careful with its timing. One of those is its Visa Waiver Program, of which the US Department of State recently nominated Taiwan as a candidate country.
While visa-waiver privilege for Taiwan is widely supported, it would have been elegant for the State Department to wait with any announcement on its decision until after the elections, lest it give the appearance of taking sides.
However, US neutrality does not mean simply a hands-off approach: It does mean that Washington needs to watch carefully and ensure that Taiwanese enjoy free and fair elections. On that front there are two major challenges: both from within Taiwan and from across the Taiwan Strait.
In Taiwan, all parties need to work hard to make sure there is a level playing field. Democracy can only thrive if Taiwanese can have a civilized debate on the urgent issues before them, such as jobs, income distribution, energy security, housing, the environment and cross-strait relations. Mudslinging or using the judiciary should have no place in such a campaign.
However, it is also important that China starts to respect the voice and the choices of Taiwanese. Democracy is here to stay and that means changes in government will take place, now or in the future. The sooner Beijing gets accustomed to that idea, the better.
Nat Bellocchi was chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1990 to 1995. The views expressed in this article are his own.
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