During the last few weeks, the US presidential candidates have been debating and setting out their positions on important issues. In doing so, their views on both domestic and foreign policies have become clearer.
But they have said little about Taiwan. In fact, former American Institute in Taiwan director Raymond Burghardt has pointed out that none of the candidates has voiced an opinion on Taiwan and probably won't. In other words, Taiwan is not going to be an issue in the coming US election.
Not exactly true. While the candidates have not set forth a position on the "Taiwan issue," it is possible to glean something about their stances. They have talked about Taiwan before and one can guess how each might treat Taiwan as president.
As a general assumption, Republican candidates are better for Taiwan than Democrats. Most republican candidates see China as a military challenge or even a threat to the US and therefore view a separate Taiwan as an asset to the US. They are thus more likely to defend Taiwan in the event that China employs military force to seize it.
Democratic candidates as a whole are anti-war and don't favor the use of the military. The last Democrat to run for president, Senator John Kerry, said he would not, if elected, order the US military into action to defend Taiwan.
Democratic candidates are tougher on China on economic issues. They want to pressure China to revalue the yuan and advocate tariffs or other punitive means to fix the huge trade deficit the US has with China, which exceeded US$300 billion last year.
But economic sanctions against China would also hurt Taiwan since a large portion of China's exports come from Taiwan-owned or run companies there.
Democrats generally don't seem to mind. They don't heed the views of many economists that the US trade deficit cannot be corrected by China revaluing its currency or by tariffs and that the US instead needs to increase savings and investment and cut taxes and regulations. Their policies are essentially protectionist, which would be harmful to the global economy upon which Taiwan depends.
In contrast, Republicans advocate free trade and would deal with China's trade offensive on a case-by-case basis -- for example, dealing with China's subsidies and violations of intellectual property rights each as an issue itself or by trying to strengthen the US economy and export more.
Among Democrats, Senator Hillary Clinton would probably be best for Taiwan. She has taken a harder stance toward China on various issues, though noticeably more on economic ones. She has been a strong critic of human rights abuses in China and more supportive of the use of US military power.
Senator Barack Obama doesn't have much of a record on US China and Taiwan issues. Recently, in a speech in Congress, he said he favors a peaceful resolution of Taiwan issue and opposes a unilateral change in the status quo. The former has long been US policy. The latter seems almost a quote from US President George W. Bush. Obama has sounded tough on China on economic issues, but has not been specific.
Former senator John Edwards would probably be the worst Democratic candidate for Taiwan. He is the furthest left on the political spectrum and talks more strongly against the use of US military force than other Democrats. Presumably, like Kerry before him, he may choose not to use US forces to protect Taiwan.
It is difficult to discern which Republican candidate would be best for Taiwan.
Leading Republicans have all taken a stance that translates into the US having a national interest in Taiwan, seeing it as sovereign and needing to protect it.
When he was mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani told Chen when he visited the city in 2001 that Taiwan is a "remarkable country." He recently opposed Hillary Clinton limiting Chinese ownership of US debt and thinks the US should deal with the trade deficit with China by building more competitive industries and exporting.
Senator John McCain has been the strongest on defense among Republican candidates and on keeping US forces in East Asia that protect Taiwan. He supports the Pentagon's "hedge" policy against China's growing military influence in the region. Thus, he stands strong for defending Taiwan.
Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has taken a strong stance on defense and favors defending Taiwan. There is no reason to think he would not do that. However, he has not said much about Taiwan.
Former senator Fred Thompson, who isn't officially a candidate but ranks high in the polls, has said bluntly that the US is obligated to defend Taiwan. He told his constituency when he was in the Senate that if he were to decide, he would protect Taiwan.
Newt Gingrich has also taken a tough stand on the issue of protecting Taiwan and preserving its sovereignty. He has spoken often about Taiwan's importance.
All of the candidates, Democrats and Republicans, have enunciated a positive view of Taiwan's democracy. But this is less important than the matter of whether the US will protect Taiwan. The point is that Taiwan's political system doesn't matter if it is absorbed by China.
In coming months, it is difficult to conceive of Taiwan not becoming an issue in the US presidential campaign. It has been in every campaign for more than half a century.
Military strategists see the Taiwan Strait as the world's number one flashpoint. The US and a fast rising China differ on Taiwan's future and that is an issue worth debating.
John Copper is a professor of International Studies at Rhodes College in Memphis, Tennessee.
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
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,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS