US President George W. Bush gave his third State of the Union address on Jan. 20 without touching on the Taiwan issue. The purpose of this annual address to the nation is to deliver a report on the condition of the union. Annually, the US president will describe what his government has achieved in the last 12 months and what he expects to accomplish in the year ahead.
Thus, it would be appropriate for the message to focus on US domestic development. Believing that tax cuts will strengthen the US' economic performance, Bush asked Congress to make permanent cuts. Bush's remedy for the national health system's woes was a typically Republican one -- he stressed the importance of "choice." He also took a firm stand on the controversial issue of same-sex marriage, emphasizing that marriage should be deemed as the union of a man and a woman. He also reiterated the importance and the success of the "no child left behind" act and pledged support for community colleges.
As for foreign policy, America's hegemonic role in world politics and the tragic events of Sept. 11 and the ensuing war on terror have further strengthened the US' global role. Of course, the war with Iraq last spring, though victorious for the US, remains a controversial issue. Bush had to defend his decision on this in his address. The only other foreign policy issue he briefly touched on was the nuclear program of North Korea.
Why no mention of Taiwan? Wouldn't China's displeasure at the referendum in Taiwan lead to tension across the Taiwan Strait, forcing the US, according to the Taiwan Security Act, to be militarily involved at a time when its troops and aircraft carriers are needed elsewhere? Isn't Bush worried about a potential flare-up of tension? The "non-issue" can be explained in a number of ways.
One, Bush administration officials believe that the wording of the two ballots for the referendum on March 20 does not change the status quo, something the US has warned against.
Two, if Taiwan or the referendum is mentioned at all, Taiwan's democratic achievements have to be recognized in a positive manner. It would be difficult for Bush to say anything negative about a democracy that, unlike France or Germany, has been a faithful ally of the US in almost all its foreign policy initiatives. Bush's advisors have probably not found a delicate balance between US concern with the referendum and its support for Taiwan.
Three, Bush could have a tacit agreement with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) that the US would continue to put pressure on President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) to return to the "five noes" he spelled out in his 2000 inaugural address and has received assurance from Beijing that no saber rattling is likely to take place. The US is preoccupied with the campaign against terrorism, postwar Iraq reconstruction and the nuclear program of the trigger-happy North Korea, and it doesn't want to add another thorny issue to its already full foreign policy agenda.
While Taiwan should be pleased that our process of democratic consolidation is not considered controversial enough for the US president to mention it in the State of the Union address, the fact that China's aggressive posturing against Taiwan fails to catch the attention of the US public is a worrying sign, especially for those who want to make Taiwan's plight an international issue.
Maybe we are asking too much; perhaps the anti-terrorism campaign and postwar development in Iraq are unlikely to be upstaged by our defensive referendum. We can expect economy, education and health care to be of vital concerns to the American people. Why is it, however, that gay marriage, a fringe issue in Taiwan at most, can garner greater attention in the US than a potential conflict in the Taiwan Strait?
In addition, if one checks the Web site of the Washington Post to see where the major candidates fighting for the presidential nomination of the Democratic Party stand on foreign policy issues, Taiwan is not there. In short, it is unlikely that Taiwan will be a focus of this year's US presidential election. Maybe our self-centered world view needs to be adjusted.
If there is any solace in the rendering of Taiwan as a non-issue, it is the absence of a usually more prominent issue -- the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Yen Chen-shen is a research fellow at the Institute of International Relations, National Chengchi University.
In the past month, two important developments are poised to equip Taiwan with expanded capabilities to play foreign policy offense in an age where Taiwan’s diplomatic space is seriously constricted by a hegemonic Beijing. Taiwan Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) led a delegation of Taiwan and US companies to the Philippines to promote trilateral economic cooperation between the three countries. Additionally, in the past two weeks, Taiwan has placed chip export controls on South Africa in an escalating standoff over the placing of its diplomatic mission in Pretoria, causing the South Africans to pause and ask for consultations to resolve
An altercation involving a 73-year-old woman and a younger person broke out on a Taipei MRT train last week, with videos of the incident going viral online, sparking wide discussions about the controversial priority seats and social norms. In the video, the elderly woman, surnamed Tseng (曾), approached a passenger in a priority seat and demanded that she get up, and after she refused, she swung her bag, hitting her on the knees and calves several times. In return, the commuter asked a nearby passenger to hold her bag, stood up and kicked Tseng, causing her to fall backward and
In December 1937, Japanese troops captured Nanjing and unleashed one of the darkest chapters of the 20th century. Over six weeks, hundreds of thousands were slaughtered and women were raped on a scale that still defies comprehension. Across Asia, the Japanese occupation left deep scars. Singapore, Malaya, the Philippines and much of China endured terror, forced labor and massacres. My own grandfather was tortured by the Japanese in Singapore. His wife, traumatized beyond recovery, lived the rest of her life in silence and breakdown. These stories are real, not abstract history. Here is the irony: Mao Zedong (毛澤東) himself once told visiting
When I reminded my 83-year-old mother on Wednesday that it was the 76th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, she replied: “Yes, it was the day when my family was broken.” That answer captures the paradox of modern China. To most Chinese in mainland China, Oct. 1 is a day of pride — a celebration of national strength, prosperity and global stature. However, on a deeper level, it is also a reminder to many of the families shattered, the freedoms extinguished and the lives sacrificed on the road here. Seventy-six years ago, Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong (毛澤東)
RSS