On May 5, US President George W. Bush called Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤).
That Bush chose to call Hu to discuss cross-strait affairs on the first day of People First Party Chairman James Soong's (
It emphasizes US concern, as well as the US' right to make pronouncements, on the cross-strait issue.
In telling Hu that Beijing should engage in dialogue with President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), Bush was also underlining that the best route between Beijing and Taipei is via Washington, and that if either side crossed the "red line," it will incur US displeasure.
All this goes to show that while the phone call was used to show mutual concern, it is also a prop for political posturing between leaders on both sides.
The crux of Hu's chat with Bush was that an appropriate resolution to the cross-strait issue was critical to the healthy development of Sino-US relations. Hu emphasized that Taiwan was an important link in the development of China-US relations, and that the basis of these relations was creating a situation in which neither side benefited exclusively from Taiwan.
This wording strongly suggests that if the US seeks to win the initiative and control in the Taiwan Strait, it would also have to contend with China, for China is certainly not prepared to take a passive role in the region.
China believes that only by retaining the initiative will it be in a position to interpret and initiate action. If it cannot do so, then it will be forced into a passive stance. For this reason, now that the disturbance over the "Anti-Secession" Law has died down, and both Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and Soong have visited, China is clearly pushing aside the US and boldly setting itself up as its own master.
Hu went on to say that he hoped that the US would support the improvement in cross-strait relations with a constructive attitude, and support efforts to achieve peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. When Hu talks about a "constructive attitude," he seems to be hinting that the US should act with true concern for the international situation and not simply out of national interest.
The subtext of Hu's remarks seems to be that while China welcomes US concern about Taiwan, it does not welcome hypocritical interference.
In speaking with Hu, Bush expressed the hope that Hu would "reach out" to Chen. The desire is to broaden the spectrum over which Hu can connect with Taiwan, reaching out a hand toward Chen and the Democratic Progressive Party in an effort to truly resolve the cross-strait issue.
The efforts by the opposition to "build bridges" has been characterized by Chen was "seeking a way toward resolution," in the hope that these visits might present new opportunities. If the trips by Lien and Soong do indeed pave the way for dialogue between Chen and Hu, then they may have had some effect. If they don't, they will have had little significance.
When Bush spoke of Chen as Taiwan's "duly elected" president, he was clearly providing him with support and reducing his isolation amid his troubles. The real question regarding the Bush-Hu conversation is how Chen will be able to make use of the support offered to him by Bush, whether Hu will accept the goodwill offered by Bush, and whether they can work together to resolve cross-strait difficulties.
Li Hua-chiu is a part-time researcher with the National Policy Foundation.
Translated by Ian Bartholomew
President William Lai (賴清德) attended a dinner held by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) when representatives from the group visited Taiwan in October. In a speech at the event, Lai highlighted similarities in the geopolitical challenges faced by Israel and Taiwan, saying that the two countries “stand on the front line against authoritarianism.” Lai noted how Taiwan had “immediately condemned” the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas and had provided humanitarian aid. Lai was heavily criticized from some quarters for standing with AIPAC and Israel. On Nov. 4, the Taipei Times published an opinion article (“Speak out on the
The image was oddly quiet. No speeches, no flags, no dramatic announcements — just a Chinese cargo ship cutting through arctic ice and arriving in Britain in October. The Istanbul Bridge completed a journey that once existed only in theory, shaving weeks off traditional shipping routes. On paper, it was a story about efficiency. In strategic terms, it was about timing. Much like politics, arriving early matters. Especially when the route, the rules and the traffic are still undefined. For years, global politics has trained us to watch the loud moments: warships in the Taiwan Strait, sanctions announced at news conferences, leaders trading
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
News about expanding security cooperation between Israel and Taiwan, including the visits of Deputy Minister of National Defense Po Horng-huei (柏鴻輝) in September and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Francois Wu (吳志中) this month, as well as growing ties in areas such as missile defense and cybersecurity, should not be viewed as isolated events. The emphasis on missile defense, including Taiwan’s newly introduced T-Dome project, is simply the most visible sign of a deeper trend that has been taking shape quietly over the past two to three years. Taipei is seeking to expand security and defense cooperation with Israel, something officials
RSS