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.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more
RSS