How precarious is Taiwan's situation? The question arises because of speculation on the state of US-Taiwan relations. Some analysts have suggested that Washington is not happy with President Chen Shui-bian's (
Chen recently said: "As an independent sovereign country, Taiwan does not belong to the People's Republic of China [PRC], nor is it a part of any other country." During the 1996 and 2000 presidential elections, China's response to this was an aggressive show of military and political intimidation. But this was counter-productive. It failed to derail the election process and both times the people of Taiwan elected the candidates that Beijing strongly opposed.
This time around, with the next presidential election in March, Beijing is trying a different tactic of avoiding overt intimidation. True, the panoply of Chinese military power, with hundreds of missiles targeting Taiwan, is conspicuous and growing in size. But shows of force by way of military exercises have been missing so far. China fears that this might strengthen Chen's re-election prospects.
Beijing apparently hopes that Washington will restrain Taipei, now that Sino-US relations are more stable with the increase in global terrorism. Chen has acknowledged growing diplomatic cooperation between Beijing and Washington. He has said that: "The US needs China's accommodation on the issues of antiterrorism and North Korea's nuclear weapons." But this to him is not a problem as long as the US is supportive of Taiwan and continues to strengthen "substantive relations."
Undoubtedly, there is some disquiet in Washington about the Taiwan situation. The fear, according to one anonymous senior administration official, is that at some point Chen's statements might cross Beijing's "thresholds that only it can define and we can't control." And Washington doesn't want to be in that situation.
Apparently, there are local elements that are keen to reinforce this perception. True to Taiwan's adversarial politics, the opposition sees an advantage in this. For instance, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) politicians seek to highlight the damage it says Chen is doing to Taiwan's business environment by provoking China. There is a sense that Taiwan's economic future is tied up with China. If so, what is the point in raising difficult political issues such as sovereignty that can only damage your economic prospects?
As Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
Easier said than done. There is no indication that Beijing will play the ball by KMT rules. Moreover, the question of identity is not something that can be engaged or disengaged at will. It is a process with its own momentum.
Then there is the American factor. Taiwan's relationship with the US is of the utmost importance. An impression is growing that Chen is creating strain in that relationship by his provocative statements, in other words, that he is becoming a troublemaker in the eyes of the US. From this perspective, a KMT government would be considered to be better able to manage relations with both China and the US.
In adversarial politics, political rhetoric tends to step beyond reality. And this is true of Taiwan too. It is true that Washington is keen on China's cooperation against global terrorism and North Korea's nuclear program. But there is no sign that it is prepared to ditch Taiwan. Indeed, the US is concerned about the lack of military preparedness for a Chinese attack.
According to a Washington Post report, "The Bush Administration has quietly embarked on an ambitious effort to restructure Taiwan's military and improve the island's ability to defend itself against China." It adds: "But the US plan is foundering because Taiwan leaders are reluctant to foot the enormous bill and force change upon the island's highly politicized and conservative military."
Indeed, military cooperation between the US and Taiwan has expanded considerably under the Bush administration. This is obviously not the sign of a frayed or fractured relationship.
But Washington would certainly not be keen on another military front in the Taiwan Strait when it is already over-stretched in Iraq and Afghanistan. Therefore, some might argue, Chen's provocative statements are not helpful.
When asked how Beijing might react to Chen's pronouncements, Ma said: "Obviously they know that this time they should not play into the hands of the DPP. They will exert pressure on Washington instead of playing the bad guy." Whether or not this is simply wishful thinking is difficult to say.
Taiwan's problem is not so much external as internal. Its frayed internal politics give China the leverage to subvert Taiwan from within. Much of the nation's business community is lured by the limitless potential of China's domestic market and export opportunities.
Business leaders clearly do not want incorporation into China but favor a political compromise to placate Beijing. According to Ma, "I don't think people are willing to sacrifice their dignity to be part of the PRC. But then again, there are quite a few possibilities that lie between sacrificing dignity and reaping economic benefits."
But there is no middle ground here. Beijing states loud and clear that Taiwan is part of China. If some people in Taiwan still believe that other options are feasible in the eyes of the Chinese, then they are simply deluded.
Therefore, unless there is a united political front on the question of Taiwan's identity, Beijing is likely to have the upper hand. And that doesn't bode well for the nation.
Sushil Seth is a freelance writer based in Sydney, Australia.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS