Taiwan is understandably upset by US Secretary of State Colin Powell's recent statement that it is not a sovereign country. He reportedly said in a TV interview, "Taiwan is not independent. It does not enjoy sovereignty as a nation, and that remains our policy, our firm policy." He has also said that, "We want to see both sides not take unilateral action that would prejudice an eventual outcome," urging them to work toward "peaceful reunification."
It might look as though Powell was simply elaborating America's "one China" policy. But in laying down its eventual outcome of "reunification," his statement is a bit over the top. There has reportedly been some clarification that his use of the terminology "peaceful reunification" should have been "peaceful resolution". But the damage is done, because it will encourage China's intransigence and bellicosity.
Ever since the US recognized communist China, Beijing's Taiwan policy has been two-fold. First, to keep up the pressure on the US to ditch Taiwan. Second, to threaten Taiwan militarily. Neither has worked so far.
Beijing had hoped that the then-developing "strategic partnership" between the US and China against a shared Soviet threat would give it important leverage to influence Washing-ton's Taiwan policy. But that didn't work. In any case, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the underlying rationale of the so-called strategic partnership disappeared. And the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989 further complicated Sino-US relationship.
Even today, China's basic Taiwan strategy remains the same: To bring about Taiwan's unification with China, with the US as a facilitator of sorts; and, simultaneously, to keep up military pressure on Taiwan.
Of late China believes it has acquired some leverage in the matter by its cooperation with the US on global terrorism, and by being not difficult on Iraq. More importantly, Washington needs China's active help to put a lid on North Korea's nuclear program.
The US is not going anywhere much with North Korea on the nuclear question. China is believed to be the key to any kind of progress on the subject.
But what is in it for China? It obviously wants a quid pro quo. And that quid pro quo is Taiwan. Beijing is not happy that its help on a range of US strategic objectives is not appreciated and rewarded. It has let known its displeasure, even hinting that this is not a blank check.
Therefore, Washington has been under considerable pressure to "rein in" President Chen Shui-bian (
Overstretched as the US is in Iraq and on global terrorism, and worrying about the unpredictable North Koreans with their atomic toys, it is keen to avoid being sucked into another conflict. As a result, Taipei is required not to anger and provoke Beijing.
Powell's statement, therefore, is intended to assure Beijing, as he was making a quick visit through Japan, China and South Korea, that the US doesn't subscribe to the idea of an independent and sovereign Taiwan. However, it still favors its resolution through a peaceful dialogue. And it will continue to sell arms to Taiwan to defend itself against Chinese military build-up (attack) across the Taiwan Strait.
The problem with such half-baked initiatives is that they haven't mollified China, but left Taiwan in a state of confusion and unease. Since Washington seems to be the conduit for Taiwan, why bother responding to Taipei's peaceful initiatives? The need for the US is to build up Taiwan as an equal negotiating partner with Beijing, and not to undermine its position.
Beijing seems to believe that as the US gets deeper into the Iraqi quagmire, and North Korea continues to be difficult and unpredictable, its leverage with Washington will only increase. That may not be true. Considering that the US is determined not to allow any rival power to challenge its supremacy, it is unlikely to allow China to gobble up Taiwan.
As for Taiwan: Even though the US is a valued ally and protector, Taipei would need to develop its military self-reliance to make it difficult and costly for China to undertake any armed adventure. At home, its political and business elites would need to develop an agreed national strategy to face the threat from across the Strait.
At the level of the elected government, though, there is no ambiguity about Taiwan's sovereign status. Chen has reiterated that "the existence of [the] Republic of China is a fact and Taiwan is definitely an independent and sovereign country."
Sushil Seth is a freelance writer based in Sydney.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath