Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao (
Taiwan was seized by Japan from China a century ago. Since 1949 Taiwan has hosted the nationalist government, the Republic of China (ROC), ousted by the communist revolution.
As part of its Cold War strategy, Washington shifted recognition from the ROC to the People's Republic of China. Over time Beijing has become an economic superpower active on the international stage; it is now aggressively pressing Taiwan to accept some form of "one nation, two systems" reunification.
Early this month the official Chinese press quoted Major-General Peng Guangqian as saying: "Taiwan's leader Chen Shui-bian(
Of course, war would "break out" only if China invaded Taiwan. Taipei is not outfitting an expeditionary force to attack China.
China's current excitement stems from passage in Taiwan of a bill allowing a national referendum, which could raise the issue of independence. Beijing, which remains a communist dictatorship, obviously doesn't like the idea of people voting anywhere, and certainly not in Taiwan on the issue of independence. In advance of his US visit Prime Minister Wen declared that Washington must explicitly oppose Taiwanese independence.
There is no reason in principle why Taiwan should not be independent. China may have been victimized when Japan stripped Taiwan from its control, but that was a century ago and the people of Taiwan today have built a separate, and free, society.
However, logic does not diminish the importance of Taiwan to Chinese nationalists. It is not just communist apparatchiks who are willing to threaten military force against Taiwan.
Involvement in any war across the Taiwan Strait would be disastrous for the US. China is not Iraq; China is a nuclear-armed state aspiring to great power status. Although the US possesses a far superior military to that of Taiwan, a mistake or desperation could turn any conflict into a nuclear confrontation. At the same time, Washington likely would find itself bereft of allies in East Asia: neither Japan nor South Korea would likely choose to become a permanent enemy of Beijing by backing the US over Taiwan.
Southeast Asian states such as Singapore and Thailand would be no more enthused about being involved. Even Australia might hesitate to serve as the US' "deputy sheriff" in the region.
Moreover, the US has much at stake in a peaceful relationship with China. The economic ties are large and Beijing has the most leverage of any party over North Korea, which Washington seeks to discourage from developing nuclear weapons.
Still, the US neither can nor should hand the free people of Taiwan over to Beijing. Avoidance of war does not mean complicity in coercion.
First, Washington should insist that Taiwan's future is up to the people of Taiwan. Taipei obviously has an interest in talking with China, but the latter has no automatic claim to the allegiance of the Taiwanese people.
Second, it is not the US' place to pronounce its opinion on independence for Taiwan. The US formally recognizes only one China, but Taiwan is governed from Taipei, not Washington.
Third, the US will brook no criticism over who it allows to visit the US. China has complained about Chen's October stopover visit in New York, but the US remains a free country open to Taiwanese as well as Chinese.
Finally, Washington should indicate that it will continue to sell arms to Taiwan. The surest guarantee of peace in the Taiwan Strait is a well-armed Taiwan with the ability to deter any attack.
In fact, Taiwan should understand that the latter offers better security than does a US military commitment. No matter what previous administrations have promised, any US president will -- and, in fact, should -- hesitate before risking Los Angeles to protect Taipei. In a crisis Taiwan might find itself very alone.
Although Washington must avoid getting in the middle of any war between China and Taiwan, it must emphasize that any conflict would wreck China's global standing. Nor should the US deny Taiwan the tools to assert or defend itself. Beijing must understand that while Washington is sticking with its "one-China" position, Taiwan's future must be decided in Taipei.
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a former special assistant to former US president Ronald Reagan.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
As the highest elected official in the nation’s capital, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) is the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) candidate-in-waiting for a presidential bid. With the exception of Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕), Chiang is the most likely KMT figure to take over the mantle of the party leadership. All the other usual suspects, from Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) to New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) to KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) have already been rejected at the ballot box. Given such high expectations, Chiang should be demonstrating resolve, calm-headedness and political wisdom in how he faces tough
RSS