Douglas Paal was director of the Taipei office of the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) from 2002 until early this year. On July 13, he spoke at the Brookings Institution in Washington to an audience of policymakers concerned with the Taiwan issue.
In reflecting on his time here, Paal made a number of observations which demonstrated his incisive knowledge of Taiwan, although -- perhaps due to time constraints -- he failed to raise the core issue in each instance.
For example, Paal touched on how Mainlanders discriminated against ethnic Taiwanese (85 percent of the 23 million population), tried to destroy local language and culture and persecuted and executed dissidents. He did not mention the 228 Incident, in which at least 20,000 Taiwanese were massacred by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), or the murder of dissident Lin I-hsiung's (林義雄) mother and twin daughters after the Kaohsiung Incident.
Paal praised the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) leadership for not stirring up the past through "rancorous legal proceedings or truth commissions" after gaining power in 2000.
The problem is that ethnic cleavage and bitterness persist to this day because there has not been admission of guilt, let alone an apology, from the perpetrators.
After World War II, the German people reflected on and properly atoned for the atrocities committed by the Nazis. The KMT's position is: Let's forget the past and concentrate on the future.
Paal rightly criticized Taiwan's media for its lack of investigative journalism. He could have pointed out that Taiwan's print and electronic media are dominated by pro-unification journalists who bombard the public every day with pro-China, anti-US and anti-Taiwan propaganda. Many media outlets are now under Hong Kong ownership and the government appears incapable of stopping the infiltration of Taiwan's media by Beijing's agents.
Paal described Taiwan as a ballot box democracy still lacking in "an invisible element that helps a democracy reduce its disadvantages and enhance its advantages."
He was too polite to say more.
The main problem with Taiwan's nascent democracy is that the KMT and the People First Party (PFP) lack the sense of fair play which is essential to the institutionalization of democracy.
The pan-blue opposition has never accepted its defeat in the 2004 presidential election. It continues to undermine and paralyze the DPP administration through its majority in the Legislative Yuan. It has tried to enact laws to usurp the powers of the executive.
After failing to impeach President Chen Shui-bian (
The leaders of the KMT and PFP promote unification with China. Through their pilgrimages to Beijing, they have in essence pledged their allegiance to the People's Republic of China (PRC). Taiwan's democracy is in grave danger because the disloyal opposition willingly works with Beijing to subvert Taiwan's democracy and sovereignty from within.
Some of Paal's comments sounded facetious. He said: "Today, the PRC and US articulate their [common] interests in peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait region."
Of course, the PRC would prefer to annex Taiwan peacefully, through internal subversion, and its soft "united front" strategy is proving quite effective with the capitulation of the KMT and the PFP to China.
Nevertheless, the modernization of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) continues unabated. The goal is to overwhelm Taiwan's resistance before the US can react. Beyond that the PLA is developing the capacity to attack US forces deployed in East Asia and to launch a nuclear attack on the US homeland. It is prudent to assume that after attaining hegemony over Asia, the PRC will eventually challenge the US' global preeminence.
If avoiding war in the Taiwan Strait is the only goal of US policy, then Taiwan's freedom could be sacrificed. The impact of Taiwan's annexation, however, would be far-reaching. It sits astride the sea lanes and air space vital to Japan and South Korea.
Once Taiwan is controlled by China, Japan will face the unpalatable prospect of developing nuclear weapons.
A nuclear-armed Japan may lack the geographical size necessary to absorb a first strike from China and survive to retaliate. On the other hand, the US nuclear umbrella could be unreliable, since any US leader will hesitate to sacrifice New York and Washington to save Tokyo. Of course, one rationale for Japan joining the nuclear club is to make sure that this umbrella will be operative.
On balance, however, it is more likely that the pacifist elements in Japan will prevail and Japan will be reduced to the status of a docile protectorate of China. In this scenario, China would be able to requisition Japan's considerable technological and financial resources to build up its wealth and power. With the combined strength of China, Taiwan and Japan, it would not be unrealistic for China to aspire to become the world superpower in the next 25 years. Either way, the US could well be forced to abandon its forward deployment strategy in Asia and withdraw to Guam and Hawaii. The US' national interests and security would be severely impaired.
Paal praised former premier Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) for his pragmatism. Hsieh was quoted as saying: "Independence is like a distant moon. We can reach for it, but our arms will never get there."
But if independence is ruled out, the only option left is annexation by the PRC, since the status quo is increasingly untenable in the absence of resolute support from the US. From the Taiwanese perspective, is it really "pragmatic" to give up hard-won freedom and accept the repressive rule of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) where there will no longer be any guarantee of life, liberty and property?
And is it really in the US' interests to urge the Taiwanese to forfeit their democracy and sovereignty so as to achieve peace across the Taiwan Strait?
Paal was much too sanguine about Taiwan's current situation and future prospects. For example, in response to a question about what would happen to Sino-Taiwan relations if KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) were to win the 2008 presidential election, Pall quoted remarks Ma made in Tokyo last month that unification was not even a topic until China became democratic.
But that same Ma in March told an audience at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) in Washington that if he were elected, he would sign a peace accord with China by accepting the "one China" principle that Taiwan is part of China. The 30-year modus vivendi that Ma proposed is a ruse.
Once Taiwan capitulates and the US' Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) is abrogated, the PLA will occupy Taiwan and the population will face massive retribution from the CCP. It is worth remembering that since the occupation of Tibet in the early 1950s, the PRC has caused the death of more than 1.25 million Tibetans through massacres and starvation.
Paal saw no use in US flag officers visiting Taiwan. Yet the current practice of allowing only junior officers to visit doesn't work. It is not easy for US colonels and captains to tell Taiwan's generals and admirals what to do to improve the nation's defense.
Dan Blumenthal and Gary Schmitt wrote in a recent Wall Street Journal article: "Only generals and admirals command joint land, sea and air operations, have experience in comprehensive military planning and the bureaucratic authority within the Pentagon to push through new initiatives to help Taiwan."
For the sake of the militaries of the US and Taiwan, the ban against visits by US flag officers needs to be lifted.
Paal also dismissed the US-Japan "two plus two" agreement as lacking in operative content. This refers to a joint statement made in February last year where Japan for the first time stated that a peaceful settlement of the dispute between Taiwan and China was a mutual concern of Japan and the US.
Actually, the US-Japan alliance is quite healthy for many reasons. Japanese Prime Minister Koizumi has built a solid personal relationship with US President George W. Bush. Japan provided logistical support for the US campaign in Afghanistan and it sent several hundred engineering troops to Iraq.
After the 1995-1996 missile crisis in the Taiwan Strait, the US and Japan signed an agreement to strengthen their alliance. Japan's national defense perimeter was expanded to include the area north of the Philippines, thus encompassing the Taiwan Strait.
Japan has been cooperating with US efforts to realign its forces in East Asia. US forces and Japan's Self-Defense Force are increasingly inter-operative.
Japan is vitally interested in preserving Taiwan's status quo as a de facto independent state. It is difficult to understand why Paal is so dismissive of Japan's potential role in helping the US to maintain peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region.
At the Brookings event, Paal was introduced by Ambassador Jeffrey Bader, a former director for Asian affairs at the National Security Council. Bader commended Paal for being pro-American, not pro-Taiwan and not pro-Beijing. He said: "[Doug] did what he had to do for US national interests, not for Taiwan's interests, not for the PRC interests."
It is the obvious duty of US diplomats to exclusively safeguard the US' interests. So why did the ambassador choose to belabor this self-evident fact?
The Bush administration pays insufficient attention to developments in Taiwan or China and the US is preoccupied with problems in the Middle East. It does not have a clear policy on Taiwan's future as part of a comprehensive, long-term strategic vision of the US role in Asia. US policy toward China and Taiwan is adrift, focusing on short-term goals and superficial, mundane affairs. There is little consensus as to what policy will serve US national interests.
Asia will most likely prove to be the most important region for US security in this century because of the rapid rise of authoritarian China and the lack of an effective multilateral security arrangement in this region. It is high time the US paid attention to Asia so government officials do not inadvertently advance the interests of another nation at the expense of the US.
At a news conference on Aug. 11, Bush said: "If we ever give up the desires to help people who live in freedom, we will have lost our soul as a nation."
Despite some aberrations, the US is still the shining city on the hill, giving hope to billions of oppressed people worldwide. Once the US loses its ideal of freedom, its influence and ability to sway other nations will decline and the world will fall into an abyss of suffering. Bush was talking about Iraq but his words apply equally well to Taiwan.
Li Thian-hok is a commentator based in Pennsylvania.
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS