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stress its core values and adhere to the principles of reciprocity and coexistence in urging the US to revise its outdated "one China" policy, while letting the US understand that whatever Taiwan does will benefit the US.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
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,