The US and China have developed a broad relationship discussing a wide range of issues -- some of which they agree upon and others that they do not.
In addition, the US has long-established agreements with China and Taiwan regarding cross-strait issues. The nature of the wording in these agreements is written with great care. With the constant changes taking place in China, the US and Taiwan, meetings on cross-strait issues are frequent and policies are rearranged.
The US-China relationship involves repeated meetings between senior leaders following significant developments. That is clearly not the case between the US and Taiwan, though there is equal need to hold high level dialogues between the two countries.
Much will be happening in the political scenes of all three countries over the next year. Taiwan has two elections coming up next year, while China has the Chinese Communist Party's 17th National Congress this year, followed by the Olympic Games next year -- which is already occupying Beijing. The US has elections for president, the House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate in November next year.
The congress in China is not likely to cause problems -- at least not immediately -- and the Olympics will continue to occupy Beijing in many ways. The people of the two democracies -- the US and Taiwan -- will soon be occupied with their elections and the changes they may bring.
The US believes it is necessary to work more closely with China. Will this become an established policy? If so, the question is, can the US maintain its strength in the region? Taiwan, a young democracy, is also occupied with social changes as more of the public identifies itself as Taiwanese.
At the same time, the US has told Taiwan that it opposes Taiwan seeking to join the UN under the name of "Taiwan." Was such a bid necessary? Aside from the fact that the UN would not allow it to join because of China's opposition, Taiwan's goal has a history. In earlier days, US experts only had to deal with one person, late president Chiang Ching-kuo (
During that time, an opposition party became legitimate. The opposition included Vice President Annette Lu (
Both obviously understood that it was only the UN, not the US, that could let Taiwan in. The Taiwanese wanted to join the UN and most politicians supported the idea. Now Taiwan has President Chen Shui-bian (
Later on, Lee pressed to get a visa to go to Cornell and today Chen is doing much the same. Both are trying to remind the world that there is a place called Taiwan -- a democracy where people are free.
The famous missile tests in 1995 and 1996 in large measure demonstrated that the leaders of Taiwan are legitimate -- a sharp contrast with the leaders of China. That was the real purpose then, not the visit to Cornell or getting into the UN.
China may not like an effort of this kind, but it has been harming Taiwan in many ways in cross-strait and international issues. Taiwan has also passed referendums that were seen as much more troublesome in the past.
The US should not meddle in this issue because the people of Taiwan have shown they support having referendums. The two main political parties say they have the right to hold a referendum on joining the UN, but are arguing over the name that should be used for Taiwan. It is not a good idea for a country to get involved in other countries' democratic processes.
Further, in next year's presidential election, there will be a decision on a new president and there may be two referendums, one on the UN and the other on the KMT's stolen assets. A total of 113 legislators will have been elected and its impact will be felt. The results of this and the presidential decision will determine Taiwan's future. It is likely to be even more tense than 2004.
As for getting the right people in the US government to better understand the complicated and sensitive issues surrounding Taiwan, there must be some process of dialogue between the two sides -- a real dialogue between senior experts from a variety of government agencies -- perhaps given a short unofficial time for them -- who can meet periodically and press for consensus on important issues.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and is special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views in this article are his own.
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman for maritime affairs Rogelio Villanueva on Monday said that Manila’s claims in the South China Sea are backed by international law. Villanueva was responding to a social media post by the Chinese embassy alleging that a former Philippine ambassador in 1990 had written a letter to a German radio operator stating that the Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島) did not fall within Manila’s territory. “Sovereignty is not merely claimed, it is exercised,” Villanueva said. The Philippines won a landmark case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 that found China’s sweeping claim of sovereignty in
RSS