In recent statements, President Chen Shui-bian (
After his election in 2000, the situation was tense: not only did China threaten to attack Taiwan, but the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) faithful in the military and security agencies didn't appreciate the election of the pro-independence Chen.
Chen and his advisers thought it prudent to try to smooth matters over by making a statement saying, "As long as the Chinese communist regime does not intend to use force against Taiwan, I promise that during my term I will not declare independence, will not change the name of the country, will not push for the incorporation of a special state-to-state model of cross-strait relations in the Constitution and will not push for a referendum on the independence-unification issue that will change the status quo. Nor will there be any question of abolishing the National Unification Guidelines or the National Unification Council."
It does not need to be emphasized that the qualifier "as long as the Chinese communist regime does not intend to use force against Taiwan" was all-important.
However, Chen was lectured time and again by arrogant and defeated KMT politicians and back-seat driving US think-tank figures alike that he should stick to the "five noes" no matter what China did.
After three years of continuing military threats and a more than doubling of the number of missiles aimed at Taiwan, Chen has now come to the conclusion that the "five noes" have reached the end of their useful life. That is to be applauded.
The fact is that the "five noes" were never popular among his core followers.
They saw the "five noes" as unnecessary roadblocks on the road to full democracy in Taiwan and full acceptance of the nation in the international community.
With the presidential election coming up, Chen is emphasizing the right of the people to hold a referendum and implying that the "five noes" might be about to meet their demise.
He is achieving two purposes: he is rallying his supporters and at the same time making it clear to the world community that China is the real threat to stability and peace across the Taiwan Strait.
There are some in the US administration, and in think tanks and the international media, who perceive Chen to be unnecessarily provocative.
These people should look twice: China is continuing to threaten Taiwan, preventing its international relations from blossoming, and building up an awesome arsenal of missiles aimed at the nation. During the past three years, Chen has bent over backwards to be conciliatory and has held out one olive branch after another only to be rebuffed by China time and again.
It is thus time for Taiwan and the international community to move towards a "three yeses" policy:
Yes to the right of Taiwanese people to determine their own future, free of interference from China;
Yes to Taiwan's right to be a full, equal member of the international community, including the UN; and
Yes to the right of Taiwanese people to choose a name, flag, and anthem which really represent Taiwan.
Instead of kowtowing to Beijing, the US should have an evenhanded policy which upholds the basic principles of democracy and human rights.
It is indeed time for clarity instead of ambiguity.
But the remarks of US President George W. Bush on the occasion of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's (
There is still time: Bush and his administration should make it crystal clear to Beijing that they must back off, dismantle the missiles aimed at Taiwan, and, if it truly believes in peaceful resolution, enter into talks with the democratically-elected government of Taiwan.
The US and other nations would also do well to rethink their policy towards Taiwan: it is not the same country as it was 30 or 40 years ago, when the present "one China" concept came into existence.
At that time, there was a repressive KMT regime, which had lost the Chinese Civil War and imposed itself on a defenseless Taiwanese population. The KMT's decades-long insistence on being the legitimate government of China was as laughable as it was outdated, but it dragged the Taiwanese people unwillingly into the unfinished business of the Chinese Civil War.
The Taiwanese had no part in that Civil War, but their future is still being held hostage to it.
It is time for the international community to break out of the chains that it has imposed on itself and accept Taiwan and its people as full-fledged members of the international family of nations.
Gerrit van der Wees is the editor of Taiwan Communique.
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto says he knows how to fix the problems facing Indonesia. Yet his economic mismanagement and authoritarian tendencies are steering the nation toward a familiar mix of currency instability and political chaos. The world’s fourth-most populous nation risks reversing the hard-won democratic and business reforms that came after the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. At that time, the rupiah collapsed and the political upheaval that followed forced former president Haji Mohamed Suharto from power. Prabowo’s administration is ignoring similar warning signs. That disconnect was apparent in a national address on Wednesday, when Prabowo projected the swagger that has
RSS