Over the past few days, extensive media reports and public discussions were made in Taiwan regarding whether US President George W. Bush had ever called President Chen Shui-bian (
This is a classical case of wasteful consumption of energy and attention to the wrong cause. What really matters and is worth observing is US policy and the perception of the Chen administration's handling of cross-strait affairs.
The triangular relationship between the US, China, and Taiwan is at a critical stage -- in view of Beijing's submission of an anti-secession bill for enactment yesterday and the EU's talk of lifting a decade-long arms embargo, among other issues.
Although the substantive content of the anti-secession bill has not been released yet, Taiwan is obviously the intended target. As the Chinese Constitution states that Taiwan is part of Chinese territory, the emerging sense of national identity and sovereign consciousness within Taiwan is alarming Beijing.
Responding to the campaigns to rectify the name of Taiwan and adopt a new constitution, Beijing clearly intends to send a warning to Taiwan to refrain from further actions heading toward formal independence. While Beijing is probably not seriously planning on using force yet, it hopes to reiterate its willingness to use force if the need arises. Otherwise, to a regime such as the one in Beijing, there is simply no need to have any legal basis or justification offered by an anti-secession law before it makes an attack.
On the other hand, recent events also suggest that it is only a matter of time before the EU lifts its arms embargo against China. This is of course very alarming to Taiwan.
It is not that China has been unable to expand its military or acquire technologically advanced arms as a result of this embargo. But with the embargo officially lifted, it will only make things so much easier and less expensive for China. Moreover, some European countries have been waiting for the lifting of this embargo in order to enter strategic military cooperation and partnership with China, which will help China attempt to challenge and counter the US' role as the world's dominant military superpower. The implication of all this is of course extremely negative for Taiwan.
To Taiwan, the reactions and the role of the US in the face of all these rapidly unfolding events are extremely critical. Reportedly, the US may withdraw government backing for measures to improve military technology transfers to European countries if the EU lifts the embargo. On the other hand, the US has also expressed concern to Beijing about the enactment of the anti-secession law and is still in the process of communicating with the Chinese government about it.
Under the circumstances, how the US leadership and government perceive Taiwan's leadership and its policies is of course important. For Taiwan, it is enough to know that the US is concerned and less than pleased about some turn of events within Taiwan. However, along with the increasingly mature democracy in Taiwan, there is inevitably a craving for self-determination and an awarness of national identity.
As suggested by National Security Council Secretary-General Chiou I-jen (
Therefore, the most imperative task for Taiwan now is to increase communication and understanding with the US. Time and energy are better spent that way, rather than speculating over trivial, unsubstantiated hearsay dreamed up by political has-beens to bolster their domestic profile.
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
RSS