While the administration of US President George W. Bush has officially objected to the administration of President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) using the name "Taiwan" to apply for UN membership this year, calling it a move to unilaterally change the cross-strait "status quo," Washington seems to be overlooking measures by Beijing to wage diplomatic warfare against Taiwan's participation in the international arena.
Recently, China introduced a series of moves in some international organizations to identify Taiwan as part of its territory. For example, in the World Organization for Animal Health's latest resolution on affirming adherence to the so-called "one China policy," it "notes" China's view that "the government of the People's Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole of China, which includes Taiwan."
While some analysts from Washington see Chen's push toward explicit Taiwanese independence through implementing a referendum, introducing a new constitution and recently articulating the so-called "four imperatives and one non-issue," Beijing's diplomatic maneuverings to exclude Taiwan's participation and legal representation in international organizations deserves more attention.
The official US position toward Taiwan and China is to oppose unilateral change to the "status quo," although US officials ordinarily use the phrase only after the Taiwanese government has acted in a manner perceived to be aggravating China.
Only until recently, Richard Lawless, US deputy assistant secretary of defense for East Asia and the Pacific, publicly accused China of changing the "status quo" in the Taiwan Strait through its rapid buildup of a ballistic missiles aimed at Taiwan. In addition to his predecessor Peter Rodman's accusation that China violated the "status quo" last year, Lawless is the first US official to confirm Beijing's military expansion has "changed" the cross-strait "status quo."
Not only have those two statements illustrated the complicated nature of US-Taiwan relations, they have also demonstrated an essential need for leaders of both Washington and Taipei to engage in a more candid, cooperative and constructive dialogue in the next nine months prior to Taiwan's presidential election.
Some analysts have emphasized that since the Bush administration is preoccupied with North Korea and Iraq, Taiwan should remain quiet and refrain from giving Beijing reasons to pressure the US over Taiwan policy.
But even if Taiwan plays the good kid, to what extent has Washington successfully urged Beijing to give more space to Taipei on the playground?
Bush's recent speech in Prague earlier this month serves as an example for Taipei and Washington to rethink their bilateral relationship. Elaborating on his idea of expanding democracy and freedom to the world, Bush cited South Korea and Taiwan as examples that prove the US can maintain friendships while simultaneously pushing those nations toward democracy.
If Bush and his administration are serious about this, they should cherish Taiwan's democracy by showing more support for Taiwan in the international arena. The Taiwanese government's attempts to safeguard its sovereignty in the face of China's constant attempts at international isolation and military intimidation should be viewed as a model democracy counteracting authoritarian suppression. Who more than Taiwan deserves the promise behind Bush's strategy of "seeking and supporting the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation?"
The US-Taiwan relationship could benefit from following such a strategy.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
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,