Recently, two articles about Taiwan appeared several days apart in the Honolulu Advertiser (the largest of the two daily newspapers in Hawaii). Richard Halloran's article, "U.S. must defend Taiwan against China," appeared on July 15 (sic).
Oliver Lee's article was published on July 22, titled "U.S. likely won't defend Taiwan from China." (sic) Lee is a retired professor of the University of Hawaii's Political Science Department.
Halloran is a former New York Times correspondent and his column appears weekly in the Honolulu Advertiser Sunday's Focus section.
They hold opposite views on Taiwan's sovereignty and consequences of a forced takeover by China. Lee believes that China can rightfully takeover Taiwan by force and thinks that the US neither has the right nor the willingness to defend Taiwan in such an event. I strongly disagree on both counts. Lee barely touched upon the seriousness of the issue, not to mention the horror immediately confronting the 23 million people of this island nation, which has not been a part of China since 1895. In my view, keeping silent on Lee's assertions can be seen as agreeing with his view points.
Therefore, I submitted my views, "China cannot rightfully take Taiwan by force," to the Honolulu Advertiser and was published on Aug. 3 in its Editorial page (sic).
My rebuttal to Lee's view appears below:
Lee readily accepts that Taiwan is part of China from a historical perspective and the Shanghai Communique of 1972. If historical claims are the sole criterion then Mexico could claim the same of California and Texas. As for the communique one should ask "What is a communique worth?" Nil, except to China and those who want to take the advantage of its cheap manufacturing capacity and access to its mass market. Regarding China's claim on Taiwan, countries have used words such as "acknowledge" (US), "respects and fully understands" (Japan), "takes note," and "admits," but rarely "recognizes."
In fact, any favorable statement towards Taiwan can be extracted from developing countries in exchange for economic aid. The state of international loyalty is such that any wording in a communique can be used to gain access to China's enormous market potential. A communique exacts no international enforceability as a treaty would, even if the word "recognizes" is used. As opposed to a treaty, a communique is not rectified by referendum, congress, parliament, or a legislative body independent of the administration (Lin Yu-chong "What are communiques good for?" Taipei Times, June 25, 2005).
Experts in Taiwanese and Far Eastern affairs such as Harvey Feldman (key architect of the Taiwan Relations Act) and John Tkacik Rethinking of One China; America's Stake in Taiwan) are people in the know. They have stated clearly and repeatedly that the US has never recognized Taiwan as a part of China. The US acknowledged what China said but has never recognized it. Halloran echoed this view in a letter to the editor (July 23). The US has Congress' blessing and the law (Taiwan Relations Act) on its side to defend Taiwan. The US can ill-afford to incur the reputation of abandoning a friend when push becomes shove, a friend and an important trade and strategic partner since the end of World War II.
Since then, the US, South Korea and Japan have recognized the strategic importance of a peaceful Taiwan Strait.
An international and peaceful Taiwan Strait benefits not only the people of Taiwan, but the world at large.
Taipei Flight Information Region handles more than 1,000 civil aircrafts from various countries flying through and no less than 500 vessels navigating through the strait every single day.
China deploys a large number of missiles in the region, which seriously threatens not only Taiwan but also world commerce. It is akin to a time bomb waiting to explode at any time to threaten the peace of the entire Asian-Pacific region.
Consequently, how could the security of Taiwan and the Taiwan Strait be considered a domestic issue and not an international one? Just imagine the consequences if the strait were to suddenly become a domestic part of China if Taiwan fell.
Unthinkable! The disruption to the world economy would be enormous.
By now, it should be known throughout the world that Taiwan is an independent country in every sense of the word -- with its own defined territory, democratic system of government, passport, currency, armed forces, and all that pertains to an independent country. Foreigners confuse the totalitarian government on China (People's Republic of China) and the democratic government in Taiwan (Republic of China).
After the peaceful transfer of power to a popularly elected president in 2000, Taiwan is now a completely democratic state. Its people enjoy a wide spectrum of freedom that even Americans would envy. The Taiwanese press and mass media have enjoyed more liberty than their US counterparts, and freely criticize President Chen Shui-bian (
The world must be made safe for democracy. The road to Taiwan's democracy has been long and arduous -- military rule after World War II, 40 years of martial law and the White Terror at the hands of the KMT.
Finally, Taiwan transitioned to a full-fledged democracy in May 2000. US President George W. Bush has praised Taiwan's democracy often. Today, the 900 Chinese missiles targeting Taiwan constitute an extreme threat to the safety of the life and property of the Taiwanese people.
All the world's democratic and freedom-loving countries should have the moral courage to demand China dismantle these missiles that threaten Taiwan, the Strait and international peace.
Lin Yu-chong is professor of physiology at the University of Hawaii's John A. Burns School of Medicine.
China badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
After more than three weeks since the Honduran elections took place, its National Electoral Council finally certified the new president of Honduras. During the campaign, the two leading contenders, Nasry Asfura and Salvador Nasralla, who according to the council were separated by 27,026 votes in the final tally, promised to restore diplomatic ties with Taiwan if elected. Nasralla refused to accept the result and said that he would challenge all the irregularities in court. However, with formal recognition from the US and rapid acknowledgment from key regional governments, including Argentina and Panama, a reversal of the results appears institutionally and politically
In 2009, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) made a welcome move to offer in-house contracts to all outsourced employees. It was a step forward for labor relations and the enterprise facing long-standing issues around outsourcing. TSMC founder Morris Chang (張忠謀) once said: “Anything that goes against basic values and principles must be reformed regardless of the cost — on this, there can be no compromise.” The quote is a testament to a core belief of the company’s culture: Injustices must be faced head-on and set right. If TSMC can be clear on its convictions, then should the Ministry of Education
Legislators of the opposition parties, consisting of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), on Friday moved to initiate impeachment proceedings against President William Lai (賴清德). They accused Lai of undermining the nation’s constitutional order and democracy. For anyone who has been paying attention to the actions of the KMT and the TPP in the legislature since they gained a combined majority in February last year, pushing through constitutionally dubious legislation, defunding the Control Yuan and ensuring that the Constitutional Court is unable to operate properly, such an accusation borders the absurd. That they are basing this
RSS