In his Lunar New Year's address, President Chen Shui-bian (
However, some US officials do not back Chen's suggestions and have even poured cold water on them. Most Taiwanese are disappointed and frustrated with the US reaction and are now questioning why the US is so willing to please Beijing at the expense of its own founding spirit and democratic principles.
Following Chen's Lunar New Year's speech, some US officials sought to collude with the nation's pro-China media outlets and exaggerate the consequences of Chen's remarks, insinuating that US President George W. Bush was disgruntled with the contents of Chen's address. In addition, they implied that if Chen refuses to reiterate the the pledges from his 2000 and 2004 inaugural addresses, then Bush will openly reprimand Chen when he next meets Chinese President Hu Jintao (
Although we should not fear China-leaning US officials and their prejudices against Taiwan, it is worrying that the US government's unfair criticism of Chen's New Year address is a blatant violation of democratic principles. When commenting on the address, the US State Department reiterated that the US' Taiwan policy adheres to the "one China" principle and the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), and abides by the three US-China Communiques. The TRA is the only one of these that is concerned with ensuring Taiwan's security and interests. The others -- the "one China" policy and the three communiques -- take care of China's immediate interests. In other words, there is a serious imbalance between US-Taiwan relations and US-China relations. It is most regrettable, in the light of this imbalance, that deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli could misconstrue Chen's desire to enter the UN under the name Taiwan as a unilateral change to the status quo. This unquestionably denies Taiwan its sovereignty, effectively shuts Taiwan out of the international community and leaves us in a political no man's land.
Sean McCormack, spokesman for the US State Department, has said that the US supports dialogue between China and Taiwan to allow the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait to resolve the issue. This is simply ridiculous. Taiwan is an independent country, completely separate from China: Taiwan is Taiwan, China is China and the two are completely different. How can one ask the people of Taiwan to negotiate with the people of China and reach a mutually acceptable solution?
The practical realities of the situation are that Taiwan has a population of 23 million to China's 1.3 billion. Surely asking these two sides to enter into negotiations is the same as asking the people of Taiwan to capitulate. What would have happened if the international community had insisted the US negotiate for a mutually acceptable solution with the people of Britain to bring an end to their war of independence? If that had happened, would the US be an independent country today?
As Chen said in Tainan several days ago, Taiwan's sovereignty belongs to the 23 million people of Taiwan, and is not to be shared with the 1.3 billion people in China. The goal of cross-strait dialogue should be to promote regional stability and peace and to avoid war, not to force the Taiwanese to capitulate. Taiwan's future should be decided by its people and its right to self-governance ought to be respected by the international community.
Chen talked of scrapping the National Unification Council and the unification guidelines, of joining the UN as Taiwan and of drafting a new Constitution in order to give Taiwan something to aspire to. If Taiwan continues along this road it will continue to have democracy, freedom and human rights, in the same spirit in which the US pursued independence over 200 years ago. The US should be pleased to see this happening and stand together with the Taiwanese, not throw us to the lions and put an end to the freedom we now enjoy.
Translated by Daniel Cheng and Paul Cooper
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
After “Operation Absolute Resolve” to capture former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, the US joined Israel on Saturday last week in launching “Operation Epic Fury” to remove Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his theocratic regime leadership team. The two blitzes are widely believed to be a prelude to US President Donald Trump changing the geopolitical landscape in the Indo-Pacific region, targeting China’s rise. In the National Security Strategic report released in December last year, the Trump administration made it clear that the US would focus on “restoring American pre-eminence in the Western hemisphere,” and “competing with China economically and militarily
RSS