The US government has made it clear that it will not back Taiwan's plan to apply for WHO membership under the name "Taiwan." On the diplomatic front, the major obstacle facing Taiwan is the US' adherence to the "one China" policy. Unfortunately, during the recent televised debate between the four Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential hopefuls, none of them pointed out how inappropriate the "one China" policy is or came up with a clear and comprehensive diplomatic strategy for Taiwan to gain international recognition.
I believe that Taiwan's diplomatic strategy towards the US should stress its core values and adhere to the principles of reciprocity and coexistence in urging the US to revise its outdated "one China" policy, while letting the US understand that whatever Taiwan does will benefit the US.
Taiwan should begin by accentuating its democratic achievements and its geopolitical and economic strategic value.
Taiwan and China share a linguistic and cultural background. Taiwan's democratic experience is the most important example for leading China down the path to democracy. As democracy deepens, the Taiwanese people are developing an increasingly strong awareness of Taiwan's independence and sovereignty, and the US government's antiquated "one China" policy only hurts the future development of cross-strait relations. This will have an impact on Washington's ultimate goal of a peaceful transformation of China.
Second, Taiwan enjoys a unique strategic geopolitical position in the Asia Pacific region and it supports the US-Japan alliance which will stop China, a continental nation, from expanding its naval capabilities. However, if the US continues to abide by its "one China" policy, Taiwan will not be able to exert its geopolitical advantage, thereby allowing the already powerful China to engage in maritime expansion.
Third, Taiwan outshines China in management, integration of mid and downstream industries and research and development. In addition, China's exports to the US are mostly made by China-based Taiwanese companies, so if Washington refuses to adjust its "one China" policy, it will in the end be restricted by China's giving precedence to politics over the economy when dealing with Taiwan.
Taiwan should then take aim at Washington's cross-strait policy and Taiwan's democracy.
First, the objective of US cross-strait policy is to help the two sides of the Taiwan Strait to settle their differences peacefully. However, Beijing is making every effort to block Taiwan in the international arena. If the US does not want to adjust its "one China" policy and help Taiwan join important international organizations, there will be no room for cross-strait negotiations on an equal footing.
Second, the circumstances when the US first formulated its "one China" policy were very different from today's growing Taiwanese consciousness. By adopting a policy that obscures Taiwan's sovereignty, the US will not be able to help Taipei and Beijing settle their differences.
Third, the US' China-leaning cross-strait policy has not only violated the basic rights of the citizens of Taiwan to purse their freedom, democracy and happiness, but it has also violated the founding spirit of the US and the administration of US President George W. Bush's policy of seeking global democratization.
Faced with a difficult situation, Taiwan must make good use of its resources, construct a discourse that best tallies with US interests and come up with a strategy aimed at closing the gap between ideals and reality. Only by doing so can we bring the international community to recognize Taiwan as a sovereign state and eventually join the WHO and the UN. Therefore, it is about time that our national leaders said no to the US' "one China" policy.
Michael Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Daniel Cheng
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