US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage recently clari-fied Washington's Taiwan policy during a press conference at the US embassy in Beijing, saying the US does not support Taiwan independence, but that does not mean it opposes it. This clarification has attracted extensive
interpretations.
This vague statement -- made on the basis that as long as Tai-wan does not claim independence, China would not resort to military assault -- has become a standard answer when Washington plays the "Taiwan independence" card. But, unlike the Tai-wan card, the "Taiwan independence" card can only be used sparingly or else the US would bring trouble upon itself.
In response to reporters' questions about the US stance on Taiwan's independence issue, Armitage offered a passive and selective answer. Although he said the US takes a neutral stance, he did not say the US "does not support unification, but that does not mean it opposes it." This would run counter to the US' long-standing support of a peaceful resolution and move toward publicly supporting a "no unification, no independence" policy. That might create new tensions between the US and China and even invite war.
Armitage's statement enables the US to achieve the effect of playing the "Taiwan independence" card without running the risk of stirring up a cross-strait crisis. This statement must be made along with the US' firm support of "one China" and the condition for not voicing opposition against Taiwan independence -- ?namely, people on the two sides of the Taiwan Strait must agree on a mutually acceptable solution. Since this condition was set up exclusively for the unification-independence issue, it naturally would cause anxiety on both sides of the Strait.
Former US president Bill Clinton mentioned several times during his tenure that "peaceful unification" was acceptable, always leaving Taiwan nervous that US policy was changing.
Similarly, this is not the first time the US has played the "Tai-wan independence" card. After Clinton announced the "three no's" policy in 1998, former American Institute in Taiwan chairman Richard Bush appeased Taiwan by declaring "not supporting Taiwan independence does not mean opposing it."
The statement did not prompt a strong backlash from China because Bush was not a high-ranking official and because his statement was different from the mainstream discourse of the White House and the State Department.
Soon after Armitage delivered the statement regarding Taiwan independence, the State Department issued a clarification, emphasizing that his point was, "If people on both sides of the Strait came to an agreeable solution, then the United States obviously wouldn't inject ourselves." The clarification suggested that China had sensed the negative impact the statement might have and therefore demanded that the US cool down the rhetoric as soon as possible.
In fact, there were many reasons for Armitage's Beijing visit. Even though China had given ground to the US on anti-terrorism and missile-related exports, the US was perhaps still justified in using the "Taiwan card" and "Taiwan independence" card to put more pressure on Beijing. After Armitage's remarks on Taiwan independence, Beijing certainly will display more goodwill and offer concessions on anti-terrorism, nuclear proliferation, controls on missile-related exports, and even the Iraq issue, in a bid to prevent the US from changing its tone on the Taiwan-China issue.
Since President George W. Bush assumed office, Washington has grasped at every opportunity to bring Beijing in line with international norms. Washington finally realized that the Taiwan independence issue can irritate Bei-jing's nerves more than arms sales to Taiwan or raising the level of reception for Taiwan's government officials. The Bush administration was extremely cautious and the rhetoric was halted immediately after a tentative try because it was, after all, the first time that such a high-level US official made a statement on the independence issue.
Many factors have made it difficult to play the Taiwan indepen-dence card. First, going too far might give the pro-China factions in the US an opportunity to criticize the administration's foreign policy. Second, it might inadvertently cause the pro-Taiwan
factions in the US to split. Third, the "independence" card can only be played in a reasonable manner when the DPP is in power. It might be out of tune while the KMT or the PFP is at the nation's helm. And fourth, the maneuver might spin out of control.
Taiwan's government promptly put out the fire after President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) "one country on each side" of the Taiwan Strait speech caused a great uproar. Armitage's "not opposing Taiwan independence" statement has invited various conjectures. Washington's even quicker moves to tone it down have prevented the crisis from getting worse. It will be worth noting whether China misunderstands or misjudges Bush's slips of the tongue about the "Republic of Taiwan," Chen's "one country on each side" statement and Armitage's "not opposing Taiwan independence" comment and their follow-up developments.
In a speech to the National Press Club on Jan. 12, 1950, then US secretary of state Dean Acheson claimed that the US' Pacific defense circle did not include Taiwan and South Korea. His remarks helped touched off the Korean War. Because the DPP government has misjudged the US' response to its "one country on each side" statement, it surely also has blind spots in expecting Beijing not to misunderstand and misjudge the situation.
Edward Chen is a director and professor of the Graduate Institute of American Studies at Tamkang University.
Translated by Jackie Lin
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