The frog in increasingly hot water is an apt metaphor for where Taiwan sits today vis-a-vis China and its military buildup.
Slowly, slowly the water is being heated: 496 missiles lined up on the coast of Fujian all aimed at Taiwan, with 75 more added yearly; heavy weapons systems regularly procured from Russia -- in the form of advanced aircraft and blue-water capable ships armed with sophisticated weaponry; and intense development of asymmetrical warfare possibilities designed to attack Taiwan's nerve centers.
President Chen Shui-bian (
Instead, after every statement by officials like Qian Qichen (
What is the democratically elected leader of Taiwan to do in the face of such intimidation? Sit back and watch as his country is boiled alive and eaten?
Chen is not a passive person. He and his Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) did not beat back 40 years of the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) martial law by meekly turning the other cheek.
They demonstrated in the streets and pushed the envelope for change until the KMT could no longer resist. They are doing the same thing now that they are faced with the Chinese Communist Party's threats.
Chen and the DPP are the peacemakers in the region and have dared Chinese President Hu Jintao (
For this, Chen was publicly rebuked by President George W. Bush.
"We oppose any unilateral decision, by either China or Taiwan, to change the status quo," Bush said on Dec. 10, as he sat next to Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (
"And the comments and actions made by the leader of Taiwan indicate that he may be willing to make decisions unilaterally that change the status quo, which we oppose," he said.
Hu Jintao expressed his gratitude to Bush in a Dec. 20 telephone call for opposing any "words and actions" by Taiwan to alter its status quo, and again warned that China would not tolerate independence.
Chen has been roundly condemned as a troublemaker by US analysts as disparate as Ross Munro and Ralph Cossa.
Cossa, president of the Pacific Forum, wrote in the Japan Times on Dec. 19: "When the Bush administration looks at the cross-strait situation today, it is Taiwan, not the mainland, that seems most intent on rocking the boat ? While Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian's recent talk of referendums and constitutional revisions may serve his domestic political agenda -- Chen is in the middle of a hotly contested re-election campaign -- his efforts to disrupt the status quo do not serve US national security interests."
Munro, director of Asian studies at the conservative Center for Security Studies, is even more blunt.
In the Dec. 18 issue of the National Review, Munro declares: "President Chen ? betrayed the United States. He did so by recklessly yet quite consciously promoting his own political fortunes at the expense of the vital national interests of the US."
How do the status quo in the Taiwan Strait and US interests intersect? US policy is quite clear and consistent: the status quo today is that there are two entities on either side of the Strait and any resolution of their differences must result in a peacefully and mutually agreed-upon "one China."
If this resolution produces the People's Republic of China (PRC) as the "one China" with Taiwan as a separate, independent nation, fine by the US.
If it means some confederated entity that unites Taiwan and the PRC, fine as well. US administrations are committed by law -- the Taiwan Relations Act -- to seeing this peaceful resolution through to its completion.
The act also clearly connects US interests in the peace and security of East Asia to this peaceful resolution.
The Congress "finds the enactment of this Act is necessary ? (4) to consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States; [and] ? (6) to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people of Taiwan. ? The preservation and enhancement of the human rights of all the people of Taiwan are hereby affirmed as objectives of the United States."
So the gnawing question remains, which side is jeopardizing the status quo across the Taiwan Strait -- democratic Taiwan, with its constant calls for dialogue based on mutual respect, or autocratic China, with its military buildup aimed at intimidation, at best, and eventual subjugation of Taiwan?
Clearly, China's leaders do not accept this status quo, continuing to insist Taiwan is already an integral part of their "one China," a wayward province to be integrated with the "motherland" by force if necessary. Their military modernization program is designed to change the status quo, by intimidation if possible, or force.
It is the Chinese leadership, and not the leader of Taiwan, that "betrayed" US trust and US interests.
As the Pentagon's July 30 report on Chinese military power notes: "While seeing opportunity and benefit in interactions with the United States -- primarily in terms of trade and technology -- Beijing apparently believes that the United States poses a significant long-term challenge ? China has embarked upon a force modernization program intended to diversify its options for use of force against potential United States intervention in a Taiwan Strait conflict ? In response to external intervention in a regional conflict involving China, the PLA would attempt to weaken [the] US or other third party's resolve by demonstrating the capability to hold at risk -- or actually striking -- high value assets."
At this point in history, the Bush administration rightly wants a candid, constructive and cooperative relationship with China.
Taiwan has no quarrel with such a relationship for it wants the very same thing.
But the Taiwanese people, staring across the strait at those 496 missiles, would like to see more emphasis on the "candid" side of the equation.
Bush should have turned to Wen on Dec. 10 and told him that the US opposes the decisions the leaders of China are making to change the status quo. China is the culprit in upsetting the balanced US position regarding the Taiwan Strait, not Taiwan.
Michael J. Fonte is the Washington liaison for the Democratic Progressive Party.
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