In recent statements, President Chen Shui-bian (
After his election in 2000, the situation was tense: not only did China threaten to attack Taiwan, but the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) faithful in the military and security agencies didn't appreciate the election of the pro-independence Chen.
Chen and his advisers thought it prudent to try to smooth matters over by making a statement saying, "As long as the Chinese communist regime does not intend to use force against Taiwan, I promise that during my term I will not declare independence, will not change the name of the country, will not push for the incorporation of a special state-to-state model of cross-strait relations in the Constitution and will not push for a referendum on the independence-unification issue that will change the status quo. Nor will there be any question of abolishing the National Unification Guidelines or the National Unification Council."
It does not need to be emphasized that the qualifier "as long as the Chinese communist regime does not intend to use force against Taiwan" was all-important.
However, Chen was lectured time and again by arrogant and defeated KMT politicians and back-seat driving US think-tank figures alike that he should stick to the "five noes" no matter what China did.
After three years of continuing military threats and a more than doubling of the number of missiles aimed at Taiwan, Chen has now come to the conclusion that the "five noes" have reached the end of their useful life. That is to be applauded.
The fact is that the "five noes" were never popular among his core followers.
They saw the "five noes" as unnecessary roadblocks on the road to full democracy in Taiwan and full acceptance of the nation in the international community.
With the presidential election coming up, Chen is emphasizing the right of the people to hold a referendum and implying that the "five noes" might be about to meet their demise.
He is achieving two purposes: he is rallying his supporters and at the same time making it clear to the world community that China is the real threat to stability and peace across the Taiwan Strait.
There are some in the US administration, and in think tanks and the international media, who perceive Chen to be unnecessarily provocative.
These people should look twice: China is continuing to threaten Taiwan, preventing its international relations from blossoming, and building up an awesome arsenal of missiles aimed at the nation. During the past three years, Chen has bent over backwards to be conciliatory and has held out one olive branch after another only to be rebuffed by China time and again.
It is thus time for Taiwan and the international community to move towards a "three yeses" policy:
Yes to the right of Taiwanese people to determine their own future, free of interference from China;
Yes to Taiwan's right to be a full, equal member of the international community, including the UN; and
Yes to the right of Taiwanese people to choose a name, flag, and anthem which really represent Taiwan.
Instead of kowtowing to Beijing, the US should have an evenhanded policy which upholds the basic principles of democracy and human rights.
It is indeed time for clarity instead of ambiguity.
But the remarks of US President George W. Bush on the occasion of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's (
There is still time: Bush and his administration should make it crystal clear to Beijing that they must back off, dismantle the missiles aimed at Taiwan, and, if it truly believes in peaceful resolution, enter into talks with the democratically-elected government of Taiwan.
The US and other nations would also do well to rethink their policy towards Taiwan: it is not the same country as it was 30 or 40 years ago, when the present "one China" concept came into existence.
At that time, there was a repressive KMT regime, which had lost the Chinese Civil War and imposed itself on a defenseless Taiwanese population. The KMT's decades-long insistence on being the legitimate government of China was as laughable as it was outdated, but it dragged the Taiwanese people unwillingly into the unfinished business of the Chinese Civil War.
The Taiwanese had no part in that Civil War, but their future is still being held hostage to it.
It is time for the international community to break out of the chains that it has imposed on itself and accept Taiwan and its people as full-fledged members of the international family of nations.
Gerrit van der Wees is the editor of Taiwan Communique.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers