The Clinton administration's development of a constructive strategic partnership with China has triggered criticism by Republican presidential hopeful George W. Bush. Bush believes that what exists between the two sides should be a strategic competitive relationship.
In the last few US presidential campaigns the question of a "China policy" was invariably an important issue for debates. Although talk and even promises made by a candidate during a campaign are not, to any great extent, binding on his administration after the election, they do, to certain degree, reflect the opinion of the US people.
In a state-to-state relationship, competition and cooperation are two sides of a coin. By emphasizing a constructive strategic partnership, Clinton expresses the US' hopes and desires for further cooperation despite on-going disagreements between the two countries. However, his administration has not tried to conceal conflicts between Washington and Beijing.
Similarly, we should not overlook the possibility of a peaceful co-existence between the two, just because Bush is stressing a strategic competitive relationship. The debates over "China policy" in US presidential races are fundamentally a question of tactics. Basic China strategy is not being challenged.
In Taiwan's presidential race, each camp has announced its own China policy. To counter President Lee Teng-hui's (
From a strategic standpoint, the ideas behind these concepts do not have a special appeal to the general public. In fact, some people may not have a clue as to what these concepts mean, despite repeated attempts at clarification.
Under all the models, including President Lee's, the maintenance of strategic ambiguities about the status quo of the cross-strait relationship is more than likely a product of the environment. The "special state-to-state" model explicitly highlights the reality of the Republic of China on Taiwan's existence -- while preserving a certain degree of strategic ambiguity by including the word "special" to circumvent the "one China principle."
Everyone who is running in the election understands the underlying subtlety. From a vote-getting standpoint, no one wants to directly confront this widely-accepted definition. All they can do to differentiate themselves is to redefine some synonyms or rearrange Lee's wording.
With China still refusing to change its sovereignty claim or its insistence on a "one China policy," how do we break the deadlock and reopen the gate for cross-strait negotiations? If any changes take place within China or in the Sino-US relationship, do we maintain the status quo or is there any appropriate responding measures?
The "one country, two system" arrangement is China's blueprint for peaceful unification. Have we given consideration to Taiwan's position or role under the concept of a free, democratic and prosperous new China? Strategies determine tactics. Has the ambiguity of strategy limited the practicality of tactics?
I think that our National Unification Guideline provides the best framework for an exploration of these issues. The guideline leaves plenty of room for analysis. I hereby suggest that all camps reread the guideline and establish a consensus on strategies.
Voters would then have an opportunity to compare the candidates' wisdom and endurance and choose the person who is most capable of reaching the agreed-upon goal and leading Taiwan in this new millennium.
Chao Chun-shan is a professor in the Institute of East Asian Studies at National Chengchi University.
A series of strong earthquakes in Hualien County not only caused severe damage in Taiwan, but also revealed that China’s power has permeated everywhere. A Taiwanese woman posted on the Internet that she found clips of the earthquake — which were recorded by the security camera in her home — on the Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu. It is spine-chilling that the problem might be because the security camera was manufactured in China. China has widely collected information, infringed upon public privacy and raised information security threats through various social media platforms, as well as telecommunication and security equipment. Several former TikTok employees revealed
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
The Constitutional Court on Tuesday last week held a debate over the constitutionality of the death penalty. The issue of the retention or abolition of the death penalty often involves the conceptual aspects of social values and even religious philosophies. As it is written in The Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, the government’s policy is often a choice between the lesser of two evils or the greater of two goods, and it is impossible to be perfect. Today’s controversy over the retention or abolition of the death penalty can be viewed in the same way. UNACCEPTABLE Viewing the
At the same time as more than 30 military aircraft were detected near Taiwan — one of the highest daily incursions this year — with some flying as close as 37 nautical miles (69kms) from the northern city of Keelung, China announced a limited and selected relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese agricultural exports and tourism, upon receiving a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation led by KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁). This demonstrates the two-faced gimmick of China’s “united front” strategy. Despite the strongest earthquake to hit the nation in 25 years striking Hualien on April 3, which caused