If elected President in November, what would Al Gore's policy towards Taiwan be like?
During a debate last January, Al Gore said "In China, we need to demand respect for human rights and religious freedom. But bringing China into the community of nations, fostering peace between China and Taiwan, and engaging them in a way that furthers our values, I think that's in our interest."
In another debate in December 1999, he supported strategic ambiguity: "... we don't want to embolden ... the hard-liners on either side of the Taiwan Strait to take some rash action."
Mouthing the mantra of peaceful resolution does not amount to a serious policy designed to deter the looming military conflict in the Taiwan Strait.
Gore's concern that Taipei may take rash action is misplaced. Beijing is the one incessantly threatening military action against democratic Taiwan.
Amid the presidential campaign, it is doubtful Gore's foreign policy advisers will have the time to reappraise US policy toward Taiwan.
At this stage, it is impossible to tell what Gore's position would be regarding Taiwan's ultimate status. Still it is useful to gather some relevant information now so we may better cope with a Gore administration.
On June 14, the American Enterprise Institute held a panel discussion on "How Would Al Gore Govern in Foreign Policy?" The main panelists were Leon Fuerth, National Security Adviser to the Vice President; former Congressman Steve Solarz; former CIA Director James Woolsey and former Senator Dale Bumpers of Arkansas, all people who know Gore well and who are friendly with him.
The panelists brought up a number of Gore's strengths. He has the "ability to spot things coming over the horizon," for example global warming. Gore will be more hawkish. He was one of six Democratic Senators who voted for Desert Storm.
In foreign policy and national security, a Gore administration will be more focused on long-term objectives and substance, as opposed to short-term political and public relations considerations as under Clinton.
Gore is said to be interested in foreign policy and would "immerse himself in the agenda more deeply." The fact that Solarz, who is familiar with Taiwan issues, is close to him can also be a positive factor.
On the negative side, Al Gore's foreign policy would be very similar to Clinton's.
Gore appears complacent about the growing military and strategic alliance between China and Russia. Gore supported Permanent Normal Trade Relations for China and opposed the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act.
His statement that he supports the "reformers" in Beijing portrays a potentially dangerous naivete regarding the nature and goals of the Chinese Communist Party.
One thing appears certain. As president, Gore is more likely to place US national interests ahead of personal political calculations in making foreign policy and national security decisions.
The Formosan Association for Public Affairs, a Taiwanese American lobbying group, has already contacted the Gore campaign staff to seek support for Taiwan.
It behooves A-bian's
Li Thian-hok is a board member at large of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs and chair of the diplomacy committee of World United Formosans for Independence (USA).
In 1955, US general Benjamin Davis Jr, then-commander of the US’ 13th Air Force, drew a maritime demarcation line in the middle of the Taiwan Strait, known as the median line. Under pressure from the US, Taiwan and China entered into a tacit agreement not to cross the line. On July 9, 1999, then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) described cross-strait relations as a “special state-to-state” relationship. In response, Beijing dispatched People’s Liberation Army (PLA) aircraft into the Taiwan Strait, crossing the median line for the first time since 1955. The PLA has begun to regularly traverse the line. On Sept. 18 and 19, it
Midday in Manhattan on Wednesday, September 16, was sunny and mild. Even with the pandemic’s “social distancing” it was a perfect day for “al fresco” dining with linen tablecloths and sidewalk potted palms outside one of New York City’s elegant restaurants. Two members of the press, outfitted with digital SLR cameras and voice recorders, were dispatched by The Associated Press to cover a rare outdoor diplomatic meeting on one of these New York streets. American diplomat Kelly Craft, Chief of the United States Mission to the United Nations, lunched in the open air with Taiwan’s ambassador-ranked representative in New York, James
Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) recently declared that aggression and expansionism have never been in the Chinese nation’s “genes.” It is almost astonishing that he managed to say it with a straight face. Aggression and expansionism obviously are not genetic traits, but they have defined Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) tenure. Xi, who in some ways has taken up the expansionist mantle of Mao Zedong (毛澤東), is attempting to implement a modern version of the tributary system that Chinese emperors used to establish authority over vassal states: submit to the emperor, and reap the benefits of peace and
Unlike its previous practice of disclosing the latest activities of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in a press release, the Ministry of National Defense has in the past few weeks followed the model of the Japanese Ministry of Defense. When carrying out surveillance and reconnaissance of the nation’s waters and airspace, it has posted real-time military activity updates on its Chinese-language Web site, explaining with text and graphs the responses and measures taken by the nation’s armed forces. The disclosed information on PLA activities show that the military is capable of maintaining regional security and safeguarding a free and open