Many were concerned about the influence this was giving to China. The statement that there are "two countries on on each side" of the Strait -- something close to the "state-to-state" policy of former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) -- exacted protests from the opposition in Taiwan, perhaps even more than in Beijing.
Many speculated that Chen's Aug. 3 statement was sparked by the news that Taiwan's diplomatic relationship with Nauru had been bought by China, taking it away from Taiwan. The competition for foreign relations is not new, however, but it came on top of a series of efforts by Beijing to block Taiwan's participation in international institutions, including non-governmental ones.
With the broadening of economic exchanges with China, international participation for Taiwan has become even more important. Participating in the international community is a matter of survival for Taiwan, but no one seemed to be paying attention.
The statement made by Chen on a referendum seemed to jolt Washington more than either Beijing or Taipei. Perhaps the reason was that the latter two understand that legalizing a referendum would take considerable time. In fact, unless the legislature's profile changes drastically in some future election, referendum legislation is not likely without some consensus domestically and with Beijing.
From the American point of view, the troublemaker tag is easy to stick. The relationship with China, by virtue of its size and its position in the UN Security Council, generates a very broad array of issues, some of which are of worldwide importance. To say that Taiwan's behavior will cause the cross-strait issue to come to the fore in the summit meeting is an exaggeration. The subject will inevitably be brought up by China in any case, but it will very likely require more time than would otherwise be the case.
Some of this must point to Taiwan, however. The legitimate concerns of the people about what they consider critical problems generates much pressure on leadership to do something. In both the "state to state" and the "one country on each side" incidents, there was a buildup of concern. In the first, there were worries that the US was drawing closer to China at Taiwan's expense. The second statement was prompted by concern that Taiwan's critical involvement in the international community was gradually being cut off.
The result was the same -- a need to raise Taiwan's international profile. Perhaps making these concerns better known to the public, or to friends, might generate some alternatives. It would at least lessen the surprise, and therefore the irritations that inevitably follows. As it stands, I suspect we are likely to witness a summit in Texas, with a China that will want to be seen as on its good behavior. We'll also probably see China pressing for some statement that will be seen in Beijing as a triumph over those troublemakers in Taiwan.
Nat Bellocchi is the former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and is now a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
RSS