When it comes to elections in Taiwan, the role of the US should never be overlooked. While US President George W. Bush's administration may not publicly endorse any individual candidate, the way it treats Taiwan's presidential hopefuls can often be politicized here at home.
That explains why local media are so interested in reporting which members of the Bush administration met Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Frank Hsieh during his recent trip to Washington.
But what is most important for Hsieh is portraying himself as a moderate and responsible leader while reassuring the US that mutual trust between Taipei and Washington can be rebuilt if he is elected president.
In other words, it is not just a trip of "image-building" but most importantly a journey of "clarification and reassurance."
Though Hsieh refused to unveil any information about his closed-door meetings with officials in Washington, he is expected to clarify any discussions of the most sensitive issue -- President Chen Sui-bian's (陳水扁) use of the name "Taiwan" to apply for UN membership.
Since the Bush administration has publicly stated it opposed such a move and urged Chen to display responsibility by keeping his promises to not change the cross-strait "status quo," Hsieh will have to decide if he endorses such a policy.
Apparently there is no legitimate reason for Hsieh to reverse such a political course. During the DPP primary, the Hsieh camp emphasized that he advocated Taiwan's participation in the UN almost two decades ago and he has never reversed his stance. However, after winning the nomination, Hsieh said there is a need to engage in more candid communication with Washington on this matter. Therefore, Hsieh's challenge will be to strike a balance between sticking to his principles and communicating with his US counterparts to straighten things out.
Moreover, Hsieh must convince the Bush administration he can do a better job than his Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) rival Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), as well as introduce a somewhat different leadership style to that of Chen.
There is no doubt that Washington's trust of Chen has eroded in the past three years. Most US officials believed Chen took bold steps toward policies such as holding a national referendum, abolishing the National Unification Council and Guidelines and stating the so-called "four wants and one imperative" in a surprising manner without properly informing the Bush administration. Given that Washington needs Beijing's cooperation on issues related to Iraq and North Korea, conventional wisdom has it that Chen should exercise leadership by not making trouble for the US.
However, such a view is erroneous. As potentially the next leader of Taiwan, Hsieh should seize the opportunity to reinforce the fact that Taiwan's steps toward democratic consolidation were bottom-up approaches and a manifestation of Taiwanese free will. No single political leader or party can manipulate such a grass-roots movement. How to forge normal and peaceful cross-strait relations is the key issue that separates the Hsieh and Ma campaign agendas. Hsieh's toughest task is to convince the Bush administration that he can exercise his political philosophy of seeking "reconciliation and co-existence" while at the same time safeguarding Taiwan's sovereignty and national security.
In light of Ma's pledge to start negotiations for a common market with China if elected, what constitutes Hsieh's grand strategy to normalize cross-strait economic relations without sacrificing Taiwan's national sovereignty?
On the matter of sovereignty, Washington once treated Hsieh as a moderate largely because of his elaboration of the theory that Taiwan's Constitution is a "one China" constitution. But as Hsieh pointed out during the DPP primary, he was simply explaining the "status quo." A collective effort, he says, must be made to change it. If this is the case, he is in line with DPP policy. Is there any gray area where Hsieh can maneuver to please both external and domestic audiences? Those are the key issues that Hsieh must address in the next 10 months.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
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