A senior US State Department official says that his decision not to talk to the Taipei Times because of its criticism of US Secretary of State Colin Powell in a Taipei Times editorial was his own, and not a decision of the department or the Bush administration.
Randall Schriver, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State in charge of China, Taiwan and Hong Kong, said, "It was a response from me personally." He added: "I didn't talk to anybody about it."
That resolved a question that was raised but which went unanswered when Schriver called the Washington correspondent of the Taipei Times to say he would not talk to the correspondent or the newspaper again because of the reference to Powell in the editorial.
Schriver objected to the description of Powell in the editorial as "that sorry wreck of a once principled man."
He said he felt that description was "way over the top."
"I have enormous respect for the man," Schriver said. "The editorial page is where the paper as an entity expresses its views. And if that's the position of the paper, then I personally have a big problem with it."
Schriver said he was not objecting to the editorial as a whole, or to the policy issues raised by the editorial.
"I was not responding to any policy statement, but what I regarded as a personal shot at the secretary," he said.
The editorial, entitled "US' Taiwan policy is in shambles," discussed recent statements by Powell and his deputy, Richard Armitage, which appeared to signal a major negative shift in Bush administration policy toward Taiwan in recent months.
During that period, Powell said that the US' intention was for Taiwan's "reunification" with China. Earlier, after a lunch in Washington with Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing (李肇星), he said -- inaccurately -- that "there is no support in the United States for an independence movement in Taiwan" because independence "would be inconsistent with our obligations and our commitment to our one-China policy."
The editorial also cited more recent statements by Armitage describing Taiwan as a "landmine" in US-China relations and asserting that "we all agree that there is but one China, and Taiwan is part of China."
The editorial pointed out that no US administration had said that before.
Armitage also expressed the opinion that the US is under no obligation to come to Taiwan's aid if China attacked.
While that is legally true under the Taiwan Relations Act, such a statement has for decades been anathema to US administrations and a violation of bedrock policies going back to US recognition of the Beijing government.
Charles Snyder is the Taipei Times Washington correspondent.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS