During his recent Asian tour, US President George W. Bush pro-claimed in no uncertain terms the warmth of the relationship between the US and Taiwan. Before leaving the US, he had strongly condemned the "axis of evil" countries in his State of the Union address, while taking the position that the democratic countries in Asia, of which Taiwan is one, are allies.
On Feb. 19, Bush, in his speech to the Japanese Diet, stated, "America will not forget its commitment to the people of Taiwan." On Feb. 20, he visited the demilitarized zone between the two Koreas, and, facing North Korea, one of his "axis of evil" countries, he gave his clear support to South Korea.
Reflecting on the Korean War, a time when the US without hesitation threw itself into a battle of life and death with the communist aggressors in order to defend South Korea, Taiwan and the free world, we are confident that the US will adopt preventive measures to deal with China's current military expansion.
Some politicians say different things to different people. Bush, however, has not done so, at least as far as the Taiwan issue is concerned, and he has shown a certain degree of both principle and persistence in saying the same things to both Japan and China.
At his joint press conference with Bush, Chinese President Jiang Zemin (
This not only destroyed the "three nos" of former US president Bill Clinton, a policy that helped China to escalate its rhetoric and military threats against Taiwan, but it also differed from Clinton's three pillars ("one China," cross-strait dialogue and peaceful solution of the cross strait issue).
Indeed, if we compare Bush's and Clinton's policies, we see that they differ, although they both call for a peaceful resolution of the cross-strait issue. This is no trivial matter, especially given the emphasis that Bush has put on the TRA. The Chinese leadership -- which has long hidden the fact of the TRA from its people but which has always reported what it calls US violations of the three communiques -- cannot let the Chinese public know that the US gives precedence to the TRA over the three communiques.
Supporters of China have defined Taiwanese localization and de-sinicization as "provocative moves." The most provocative aspect of cross-strait relations, however, is China's threat to use military force, since it violates the principle of peaceful resolution of the cross-strait issue.
In his speech at Tsinghua University, Bush was unwilling to discuss the cross-strait relationship. In their questions, however, students kept coming back to the issue and so Bush was forced to reiterate his support for the US "one-China" policy. He did, however, also once again emphasize the US commitment to the people of Taiwan made in the TRA. This will have informed both the Tsing-hua students and the Chinese public about the TRA and given them a better understanding of the triangular relationship between the US, China and Taiwan.
The US-China relationship is a complex one. Although changes in the international situation have placed a focus on anti-terrorist activities, the US still does not look upon China as an ally.
In a Feb. 17 interview with CNN, during a visit to Japan, US Secretary of State Colin Powell said that China is neither a strategic partner nor a competitor. Powell is one of the doves in the US government and yet he does not recognize China as a partner.
The hawks in the government probably wouldn't accept the proposition that China is not a competitor. A clearer way to put it would be to say that China is not an enemy, since this would fit with the US policy of engagement and containment of China. Bush's comments at his press conference with Jiang, that China should influence North Korea, were an obvious attempt to put pressure on China to cut its shady relations with members of the "axis of evil."
Due to the international situation and to issues left unresolved by history, the relationship between the US and Taiwan isn't perfect and has even been damaged. Time should heal the problems and Taiwan could even be a bit more active without causing a counter-reaction. Since China's reach is wide, enabling it to use Taiwanese politicians to damage Taiwan-US relations, each step must be taken cautiously and mainly through unofficial channels to avoid leaks which can cause unnecessary disturbances.
Efforts should also be made to avoid statements that may incite suspicions or otherwise damage the relationship. Some people, for example, keep calling the US unreliable, saying that it might abandon Taiwan at any time, while people at the other extreme emphasize Taiwan's self-respect, saying that the country does not need to rely on the US. Some of these people were given senior posts in the KMT government and now talk about "dignity" to please China. When they were in the government they acted like slaves before the US and now they do so before the Chinese government.
After World War II, the US wanted to abandon Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) because of the KMT's pervasive corruption. The US has abandoned other Asian allies because they were too corrupt and had lost the support of their people. When the US opened diplomatic relations with China it did so out of a realistic view of its interests, but Congress also passed the TRA to prevent certain politicians from abandoning the nation-building ideals of the US.
Taiwan needs to join the world with dignity. To be able to enjoy the respect of the US government and the American people, Taiwan must first of all have self-respect and consolidate a healthy democracy, improve and strengthen its economic situation and further develop its relationship with the US.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry