In the US-Taiwan relationship, there are some similarities in the style, and the state, of presidential leadership. In the continuous watch of what China is doing and in the amount of time the respective administrations have to prepare for the next presidential election. In this process, the US ought to be watching the contest between the two major political parties in Taiwan, just as it is without doubt watching events in China.
If it is watching, it will see the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in turmoil, as one would expect after being badly beaten by the opposition in local elections. It was not a surprising defeat, but an unexpectedly large one that many within the party ranks believe could have been avoided.
An attempt during the first DPP administration to change the agriculture and fishery credit unions -- which for decades had been used by the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to maintain their hold on local elections -- was proposed, but the proposal was never acted upon. Many believe it could have reduced if not completely changed the results of the recent elections.
During the last campaign, changes to the preferential 18 percent interest rates that are given to some retired government bureaucrats and military personnel (a holdover from the pre-democratic system) were proposed. However, some are already suggesting this ought to be reviewed. There was also an apparent effort to prosecute candidates who participated in vote-buying (of which it is believed a very large number had been caught during the campaign), but the "black gold" problem still may not be properly addressed.
Another element that many believe is the main reason for the defeat is the revelation of corruption within the government -- a subject that the DPP had previously tried hard to associate with the opposition party. Indeed, the polls seem to indicate that the KMT gained its usual number of votes in these elections, but the DPP's number of votes dropped significantly.
On the KMT side, observers see the results greatly strengthening the standing of the new party chairman. He was already in a strong position given his experience in Taiwanese politics and his name recognition. More importantly, his English-language capability and his understanding of "Western" thinking gives him a perceived advantage over most potential DPP candidates. Following the elections, his statements have been well received both in Taiwan and the US.
Though the KMT's recent victory clearly helped him gain the support of more members within the party, there are still important difficulties to overcome. There are at least three internal matters that need addressing. The old party elite, mainly but not entirely "mainlanders," who disagree with some of the Chairman's stated objectives. Party membership is 70 percent "localized" (ie, Taiwanese,) and there are two individuals who are at least his match in politics -- Wang Jin-pyng (
The two major political parties in Taiwan will struggle with each other one way or the other for the next two-and-a-half years. China has already shown that it can interfere, indirectly through the international community and more directly in Taiwan's domestic affairs. The US on the other hand can obviously make its concerns known to Taiwan, but there is now a potential difference in Taiwan's relationship with China that could alter the US' interests there.
This could, under some circumstances, influence the US' still evolving relationship with a much different China. The US-China relationship will not just be different from the past when the US' present relationship with Taiwan was formed, but different even from its present common democratic system.
To be sure, US President George W. Bush, more than past presidents, presses the need for democratic values with China. But for practical reasons he also works to improve the US-China relationship. The biannual meeting headed by Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick is an experiment in finding ways to strengthen common interests while developing means of managing issues that are problematic. It invites China "to work with us to shape the future international systems." It is intent on avoiding Cold-War tensions and the old balance of power systems.
Where will Taiwan stand in this potential new international system?
In Washington, all the issues that encompass both Taiwan and China seem to have drawn potential policies in different directions. It may be strengthening those that see the relationship with China as far more important, Taiwan democracy notwithstanding; it may influence those that see a different kind of Taiwan possibly moving to a closer relationship with China; or it may concern those that see either one as threatening. The political squabbles taking place in Taiwan are important and part of a free democratic system. Will the people be influenced to accept a different future for Taiwan?
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and is now a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
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