Sun, Feb 12, 2006 page8

• US must support democratic ideals

  • The Liberty Times Editorial
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  In his Lunar New Year's address, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) outlined three new goals for the nation, including the abolition of the National Unification Council and unification guidelines, gaining entry into the UN under the name of Taiwan, finalizing the draft of a new constitution this year and holding a referendum on that Constitution before the end of 2007. Clearly, Chen was attempting to urge Taiwan to pursue its own direction.

  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 (胡錦濤), forcing Chen to back down. Chen's remarks did come as a surprise for the US government, for Taipei did not inform Washington of what Chen would say in his Lunar New Year's address. Therefore, both sides are now busy improving communication channels and seeking to mend bilateral relations. As of yet, Taiwan has not received any US request that Chen reiterate his pledges, indicating that these unfriendly messages represent the bias of some US officials against Taiwan and cannot be construed as new US Taiwan policy.

  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
• Most Popular

  • 1

    China reserves offshore airspace for 40 days without explanation: WSJ

  • 2

    Danish envoys’ privileges revoked over naming controversy

  • 3

    Eight million barrels of oil to set sail for Taiwan this month

  • 4

    Foreign exchange reserves fall below US$600 billion

  • 5

    Universities neglect to warn students of China danger: MOE