During his visit to China, US Vice President Dick Cheney met with the top four leaders, President Hu Jintao (
All the "four big heads" indeed focused on that issue, demanding that Washington keep its promises of insisting on the "one China" policy and opposing Taiwan independence and any changes to the status quo. They also demanded that Washington not send any "wrong messages" to Taipei.
But Cheney did not give in to the Chinese pressure. He even defended the US Taiwan policy in response to Beijing's opposition to the sale of a long-range early-warning radar system to Taiwan, as well as US commitment to the Taiwan Relations Act. He also stressed that the US has increased sales of defensive weapons to Taiwan due to China's expansion of ballistic missile deployment.
Still, he reaffirmed once again that the US does not support Taiwan's independence, and that "the US government is opposed to any unilateral moves on either side to change the status quo."
Cheney's remarks seemed to be a major disappointment to China. In fact, in the hope that perhaps he would come up with some unfavorable words about Taiwan, China's Taiwan Affairs Office cancelled its two regular press conferences after Taiwan's presidential election on March 20, wishing to make a fuss about Cheney's comments right before President Chen Shui-bian's (
Unfortunately, Cheney's call for an early resumption of cross-strait talks failed to attract Beijing's attention. In his speech at Shanghai's Fudan University last Thursday, his advocacy of both freedom and democracy, and the freedom to choose national leaders, also failed to attract any response there.
It remains to be seen whether his trip to China can add some points to the re-election bid of US President George W. Bush.
Looking into the future, Cheney's declarations that the US opposes any unilateral changes to the status quo across the Strait will remain the keynote in the triangular relationship.
Yang Chih-heng is an associate professor in the Graduate Institute of Southeast Asian Studies at Tamkang University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS