Former US president Ronald Reagan passed away on June 7 and a state funeral was held to pay homage to the nation's "cold war victor." Reagan's supporters hold him in high esteem.
They credit "Reaganeconomics" for leading the country to prosperity in the 1980s and laud Reagan's tactics of using an arms race to drag down the Soviet Union's economy and thus speed the meltdown of Communist regimes in Eastern Europe. The 1976 Nobel Laureate in economics, Milton Friedman, also penned an eulogy for Reagan in the Wall Street Journal and confirmed his contribution.
According to Zhang Wuchang (
Many people in Taiwan also regard Reagan as the most Taiwan-friendly US president (a final judgement on US President George W. Bush needs to wait until his tenure ends). Yet the US-PRC Joint Communique of Aug. 17, 1982, signed within Reagan's presidency explicitly stated that "its [the US'] arms sales to Taiwan will not exceed, either in qualitative or in quantitative terms, the level of those supplied in recent years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the US and China, and that it intends to reduce gradually its sales of arms to Taiwan, leading over a period of time to final resolution."
The memoir of James Lilley, the director of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1982 to 1984 and ambassador to China from 1989 to 1991, details the beginning and subsequent development of the 1982 joint communique. Lilley quoted his old friend Randall Schriver, now deputy assistant secretary for East Asian and Pacific affairs, reporting that Reagan did not realize the Communique's severe damage wrought on Taiwan until the last minute. According to Lilley's quotes from Schriver, Reagan hastened to redress the wrong by dictating a memo to ensure that the US would not betray Taiwan.
The essence of Reagan's oral memo was to offer more arms to Taiwan if China grew belligerent or its built-up military force threatened stability in the region, regardless what the Communique said about the quality and quantity of arms sales. As an executive order, the memo enjoys a similar legal status as the Taiwan Relations Act and has become part of the framework on which the security of Taiwan is built.
One month prior to the promulgation of the commun-ique, the Reagan administration made "six assurances" in which the US stated that it would not act as a mediator between Taiwan and China, not force a negotiation, not set a date for termination of arms sales to Taiwan, not consult with China over arms sales to Taiwan, not alter terms of the Taiwan Relations Act and not change its position over Taiwan's sovereignty. The "six assurances" helped keep a tight rein on the US whenever its policy bent towards China. Moreover, Lilley also revealed that Reagan was displeased with the then-secretary of state Alexander Haig's performance over Taiwan. Reagan eventually fired Haig and his subordinates.
Given Reagan's friendly attitude to Taiwan, one cannot help but ask why the US still signed the communique with China. On Aug. 17, 1982, the day the Communique was signed, the assistant secretary of state for East Asia and the Pacific, John Holdridge, explained the reason to the Senate's Foreign Relations Commitee. Holdridge said that the US and China had been negotiating the issue of arms sales for months. The US signed the Communique to keep the US-China relationship from relapsing into antagonism. Apparently, China's threats frightened officials in the Department of State into signing the communique.
For both the incumbent US president or future presidents, two lessons are to be learned from the aforementioned incidents:
First, US diplomats in the Department of State lack an understanding of China's behavior as a political hooligan. Often, the US turns soft under China's intimidation. China's attempts to cozy up to the US also work, and the US is duped by China's deceit. Besides, some Western experts on China issues often come up with bad ideas, since they have lost themselves in their China complex.
Second, the US's main enemy now is global terrorism, replacing the former Soviet Union. If the US follows the same old Kissinger line, the US will be asking for trouble by leaving autocratic China to rise in power. Reagan's arms race, which dragged down the Soviet Union, now can hardly do the same for China as it is the US' transnational enterprises that are feeding China's authoritarian regime.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
TRANSLATED BY WANG HSIAO-WEN
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
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
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with