China's attempts to isolate Taiwan have failed in the most important arena: human rights and democracy. Thus, Vice Minister Wang Zaixi's (
Challenges abound: can China's new fourth generation of leaders apply that wisdom about dialogue to cross-strait policies? Conversely, can President Chen Shui-bian (
There is a new spirit of confidence in Taiwan, arising from the unprecedented recognition and international space created by a governance system emphasizing human rights. Chen's prestigious award from the International League for Human Rights has delivered to Taiwan long-overdue recognition. As noted in New York City that night by several speakers, the example of Chen and Taiwan offers hope, the most precious of intangibles, to countries in transition from authoritarianism to democracy.
It is a long hard journey from the abstract Universal Declaration of Human Rights to practical civil and political rights in a specific place. Chen now joins global icons like former South African president Nelson Mandela, former UN secretary general U Thant, humanist Elie Wiesel, while elevating Taiwan in global attention. Favorable media play and attention from people of conscience are now focused on Taiwan's impressive record on human rights.
China, sadly, still fails to understand its economic leverage with Taiwan, relying instead on overt military coercion. We do not know how much of this is a result of internal politics in dealing with the People's Liberation Army. Ideally, collective prosperity will ultimately lead to a peaceful resolution.
China uses trade and politics to deny Taiwan diplomatic space. But, instead of triggering a war between China and Taiwan, the Chen presidency, especially if Chen wins a second term, presents China with an evolutionary model that merits treatment as an equal negotiating partner. The estrangement that arose naturally from the Chinese civil war should have ebbed with the fall from power of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) after 51 years of governing Taiwan. Perhaps it will yet.
Taiwan's leadership understands that Taiwan cannot declare independence now given both Chinese overt pressure and American diplomatic desires. Thus, the proposed new constitution is alleged to be consistent with Chen's pledge of no declaration of independence so long as China avoids an overt attack.
But, just as the determined and powerless opposition leader fought repressive KMT tactics in Taiwan, Chen will also seek to advance the government mechanisms to prepare for the future, including increasing cross-strait economic integration. In a democracy, we ought not to expect anything less from a political leader. If China, however, delays negotiating with a second-term Chen, Chinese short-sightedness may be rued by future Chinese.
Indeed, Taiwan's long delay in dealing with Europe -- until the early 1980s -- illustrates the lost opportunities of time lags. Of course these relations are unofficial, but trade is booming, and visitors, cultural exchanges and representative offices are widespread on both sides.
The unanswered question is whether Taiwan is crossing a "line in the sand" with Beijing by changing its old 1947 KMT Constitution and holding a referendum to endorse a new constitution. Logically, the answer is no, since nothing in the proposed document seemingly will deal with sovereignty. Rather, governmental housecleaning and reorganization are the apparent drivers.
Obviously Beijing is anxious about both the symbolism of such changes and the reality of further distance between Taiwan and China. Yet, Taiwanese of all parties have agreed for decades that support for independence at the risk of war is not a desirable option. Moreover, US President George W. Bush has signaled that America will defend Taiwan if the PRC launches an unprovoked attack. Thus, again, Beijing may be better off opening negotiations with Taiwan. Even prolonged Chinese gamesmanship might, over time, improve China's attractiveness to the people of Taiwan if it is accompanied by democratic developments. Continued rejection of dialogue merely strengthens those who favor eventual independence.
The American position in this prolonged shadow dance is clear. The US wants a negotiated settlement, acceptable to both sides of the Strait. Americans applaud democratization but take no position on sovereignty absent a mutual agreement. American geopolitical interests dictate a continuation of the Taiwan Relations Act until both parties can reach that elusive mutual agreement. Global sympathy for Taiwan's position, especially on the World Health Organization, is widespread, but a cautious diplomacy is the best way to exploit these developments. Creating new anxieties and tension is the quickest way to lose a positive image and revert to the old and fruitless cross-strait game.
Taiwan's dynamic society is continuing its exemplary transition due to popular pressure for democratic reforms and human rights. And, to be fair, credit must be given to former president Chiang Ching-kuo (
A crucial future act is the rewriting of the Constitution. America's founders, realizing that the Articles of Confederation did not provide adequately for their new democracy, crafted the US Constitution. Many people in Taiwan also recognize that their new democracy must draft a new constitution for current realities, replacing the 1947 document. Just as in 1787, a new constitution ratified by the Taiwanese people in an internal referendum to provide future stability is desirable. Nothing in this process needs to fundamentally change Taiwan's status with either the American or Chinese governments.
Taiwan has fundamental issues to settle: the number of branches in government, single-seat or multiple-seat legislative districts, presidential authority, protection of individual rights, the autonomy of a modern legal system as compared to Chinese historical practices of legalism, and stripping away excess layers of bureaucracy. These reforms must proceed as have earlier reforms that have removed the military from politics.
The oldest son of a sugar plantation worker, Chen has had a difficult life as an outsider that, along with his legal talents, has prepared him to deal with China. But China is not yet prepared to deal with a diversified Taiwanese democracy. Chen can interact with and win votes from the three main electoral groups: Taiwanese, Chinese and Hakka. And, unlike in the time of my early 1970s visits, when identification cards emphasized birthplaces, people today just identify themselves as Taiwanese.
Beijing has always hoped that Chen would be a one-term electoral aberration. Opinion polls rise and dip for both the green and blue candidates, but Chen has introduced a magnetic new element to voters. Indeed, even a pan-blue victory next March cannot reverse the movement of Taiwanese society toward greater civil and political rights.
Today China is in a position not unlike the American Congress when former president Jimmy Carter presented Congress with a one-and-a-half-page bill breaking off diplomatic relations with Taiwan. New policy avenues and creativity are essential if the Chinese want to cultivate Taiwanese opinion.
Beijing needs to adopt "sugar diplomacy" and get real negotiations under way on an equal basis.
If they choose to wait until after a new constitution has been approved through a referendum before beginning negotiations, they are, in American idiom, "giving the game away." Timing often dictates political positions.
Roy Werner is chief operating officer of the Formosa Foundation (US).
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under