This week, the 40th anniversary of the 1972 visit to China by former US president Richard Nixon and his national security adviser, Henry Kissinger, will be celebrated in Washington with a major conference at the US Institute of Peace. Celebrities like Kissinger himself will herald “The Week that Changed the World.”
While we indeed can celebrate the fact that 40 years ago, the US took steps to end China’s political isolation and normalize relations with the People’s Republic of China (PRC), we also need to see what needs to be done to end a remaining injustice, the continuing political isolation of Taiwan.
In the early 1970s, Taiwan was ruled by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) under the dictator Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had come to the island after World War II. Chiang ruled with an iron fist and did not allow the native Taiwanese (85 percent of the population in Taiwan at the time) any say in the political system. Chiang believed in reconquering the mainland and maintained the pretense of ruling all of China.
Over the years, that fiction became less tenable, and with Resolution 2758 in October 1971, “the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek” were expelled from the UN. The Nixon-Kissinger trip followed shortly thereafter. De-recognition by the US came a few years later, under then-US president Jimmy Carter.
While these developments normalized relations between the PRC and the West, at the same time they pushed Taiwan into political isolation.
Taiwanese, who did not have any say at all during the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, were still without a voice in their national affairs. This only came after the country’s momentous transition to democracy in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Suddenly, Taiwanese could speak freely and express their views on their future.
One of the first topics on the agenda under this newly found freedom was membership in international organizations, or “international space.” However, because of the clout of a rising China, the international community has been hesitant to respond positively to this quest for international recognition. Taiwanese, pragmatic as they are, are made to do with an uneasy “status quo.”
Still, one wonders if visionary leadership was able to break through barriers of conventional wisdom and mainstream thinking 40 years ago, why can we not break through similar barriers in the present situation and work toward the normalization of relations with Taiwan?
For China, it would be much more advantageous to be able to work with a friendly neighbor on the basis of mutual recognition. It could stop its military buildup, dismantle the weapons aimed at Taiwan and put those resources to good use in building the economy. That is the only way in which the cross-strait conflict can be removed as one of the Cold War’s remaining flashpoints.
For the US and other Western nations, the normalization of relations with Taiwan would mean increased trade, cultural and, yes, political exchanges with one of the few vibrant democracies in East Asia. For Taiwan, these exchanges are a lifeline for its freedom and democracy. Its future as a democratic nation depends on it.
So, as we celebrate the achievements of 40 years ago, let us take steps to help bring the 23 million Taiwanese of a political isolation imposed on them in the early 1970s by unfortunate circumstances beyond their control. Since then, they have fought hard to achieve their democracy and deserve to be accepted as a full and equal member in the international community, just like any other nation.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan. 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