The US House of Representatives on June 28 passed a foreign aid amendment bill barring the US Export-Import Bank from approving US$5 billion loans to build four nuclear power plants in China. The lawmakers introducing such a bill said that at the juncture when the US faces financial difficulties, using taxpayer money to assist China's development in this way is not only unreasonable, but dangerous. The sum of US$5 billion is a lot of money, but there is the prospect of supplying more than US$5 billion in equipment and facilities.
By the standards of Taiwan's pro-unification camp, turning down the loan is missing a great opportunity. They would see the situation as isolated from other events and take the attitude that "if I don't sell the goods or provide the loans, others will."
But the US House of Representatives voted a significant 334-114 margin to pass the amendment bill. These US lawmakers are not driven by ideological thinking, but instead take national security and the rights of all Americans as their top priority. It is only Taiwan's pro-unification lawmakers who insist on classifying "love of country" and "love of Taiwan" in completely ideological terms.
US lawmakers are certainly no fools. They, of course, understand that if they refuse China the money, other countries may lend it to them. But the US attitude is that if other countries lend the money to China, that is their business. The US is not only concerned with business opportunities, but safeguarding US interests and national security is more important than benefiting commercial interests.
On June 30, two days after the US House rejected the US$5 billion in foreign aid to China, it overwhelmingly voted 333-92 for an amendment bill and 398-15 for a non-binding resolution to press President George W. Bush to review the China National Offshore Oil Corp's (CNOOC) US$18.5 billion bid to purchase the US' Unocal Corp.
Representative Richard Pombo, a Republican, said that "Such a move may not be consistent with free market principles or in the best interest of US national security." Although this non-binding resolution expressing the House's position cannot compel the action of the US government, it is important for the two following reasons.
First, the resolution shows the US Congress' "concern for the US economy and security." Is it true that the rise of China has threatened the US economy and security? In fact, given the more than 10,000km between the US and China, China cannot have any substantial or immediate impact on the US economy. Besides, US$1.6 trillion of China's GDP is relatively insignificant compared to US$11.7 trillion of the US' GDP. Thus, there is still a long way for China to go if it wants to catch up with the US.
Despite this, US lawmakers still have to take precautions by giving China's potential threat careful thought in order to carry out their duties of supervising the government.
The other implication of the resolution is to remind the government that China's foreign trade policy does not conform with free-market principles. As a result, China should not be treated the same as other democratic countries while assessing international business takeovers. Not long ago, on April 6, the US Senate voted 67-33 to allow a vote on a bill that would impose a 27.5 percent penalty tariff on Chinese imports if China failed to revalue the yuan within six months.
This Senate resolution similarly revealed that the Chinese government has kept its yuan at an artificially low rate, violating free market principles in order to gain an unfair advantage in the world market.
We see that when faced with the threat from other nations, both the US Senate and House can jointly shoulder the responsibility to protect Americans and safeguard the national interest regardless of business interests.
We hope that the Legislative Yuan can emulate the spirit of the US Congress by making national security a top priority when making laws rather than changing their minds constantly because of "goodwill" gestures.
Further, we hope that our lawmakers can soon pass the draft of the sensitive scientific technology protection bill (
Meanwhile, we call on the Chinese government to revalue the yuan. If they do not, we should follow the US example and pass a law to demand the government take appropriate measures, such as revaluing the NT dollar. If this is done, not only will Taiwan's national security not be compromised, but it might even lead to another wave of Taiwan's economic miracle.
Huang tien-lin is a national policy adviser to the president.
TRANSLATED BY LIN YA-TI
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