Because of Washington's troubles with Iraq, Iran and North Korea in addition to the rise of China, the US is leaning more and more toward China in the triangular relationship between the US, China and Taiwan.
It opposed Taiwan's peace referendum in 2005, ending the National Guidelines for Unification and the National Unification Council and now also the referendum on applying for UN membership using the name "Taiwan," although these were steps that furthered democratization.
The US says these referendums were attempts to unilaterally change the "status quo" across the Taiwan Strait.
A US official has even said that "Taiwan, or the Republic of China, is not at this point a state in the international community."
Under pressure from China, it could well be US concerns about China's strategic cooperation in solving the issues in North Korea, Iraq and the Middle East that forced the US to adjust its policy toward the "one China" policy framework established by the three joint communiques of China and the US.
Washington's pressure on Taiwan is based on China's bottom line.
But when we look at relations between the US, China and Taiwan, there is no real need for the US to give in to China so much. China still relies on the US for investment, open up its market and in high-tech development. Also, the actual contribution that China could make in solving the problems the US has with North Korea and Iraq is not that great.
Taiwan, on the other hand, always looks to the US for its livelihood. Now diplomatic relations between the two countries are diminishing and as soon as the US brings out its "one China" policy, there is nothing Taiwan can do.
The US of course feels that putting pressure on Taiwan is the most simple and effective way to preserve stability in the Taiwan Strait.
Can the US really afford to boss Taiwan around like this? Does it really not need Taiwan's strategically advantageous geographic position to protect its own interests?
Now that Taiwan is in a situation where it holds a lot of bargaining chips, the first thing it should do is change its diplomatic toward the US from being the weak party and nodding in agreement to everything the US says, to loudly and bravely telling the US the wrongs of its "one China" policy and poining out why this policy is not beneficial to the US.
Taiwan can point out that the "one China" policy, which the US established as a part of its strategy of getting closer to China in order to control the Soviet Union, isn't suitable anymore in the current era of globalization.
This policy is not useful in solving the conflicts between China and the US over trade and other strategic benefits that have arisen now that China is on the rise. It also isn't compatible with the "status quo" of one country on each side of the Taiwan Strait and goes completely against public opinion in Taiwan.
The two sides of the Strait aren't able to resolve their conflicting opinions as long as the US maintains its policy of keeping the issue of Taiwan's sovereignty unclear. This is the fuse that might set off the powder keg that is the situation in the Taiwan Strait, and that is the dilemma facing the US.
Moreover, Taiwan should use the problem of North Korea to improve its international circumstances and influence the upcoming presidential elections in the US. US President George W. Bush has already been reduced to a lame duck.
Taiwan should take advantage of the referendum issue to spark serious debate about the position of Taiwan in the US.
Through US organizations that sympathize with Taiwan, think tanks and the power of public opinion, the Taiwanese government should make Taiwan a major international issue during the US presidential election campaign.
It should continue to use the rich resources and experiences it has gained from its strategic geographic position, economic globalization and successful democratization.
It should urge the future leaders of the US that the best strategy for them in Asia is to correct or change their old "one China" policy.
This way, Taiwan can turn defeat into victory, and create a favorable space for Taiwan to enter the UN with the support of the US.
Michael Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
Speaking at the Copenhagen Democracy Summit on May 13, former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said that democracies must remain united and that “Taiwan’s security is essential to regional stability and to defending democratic values amid mounting authoritarianism.” Earlier that day, Tsai had met with a group of Danish parliamentarians led by Danish Parliament Speaker Pia Kjaersgaard, who has visited Taiwan many times, most recently in November last year, when she met with President William Lai (賴清德) at the Presidential Office. Kjaersgaard had told Lai: “I can assure you that ... you can count on us. You can count on our support
Denmark has consistently defended Greenland in light of US President Donald Trump’s interests and has provided unwavering support to Ukraine during its war with Russia. Denmark can be proud of its clear support for peoples’ democratic right to determine their own future. However, this democratic ideal completely falls apart when it comes to Taiwan — and it raises important questions about Denmark’s commitment to supporting democracies. Taiwan lives under daily military threats from China, which seeks to take over Taiwan, by force if necessary — an annexation that only a very small minority in Taiwan supports. Denmark has given China a
Many local news media over the past week have reported on Internet personality Holger Chen’s (陳之漢) first visit to China between Tuesday last week and yesterday, as remarks he made during a live stream have sparked wide discussions and strong criticism across the Taiwan Strait. Chen, better known as Kuan Chang (館長), is a former gang member turned fitness celebrity and businessman. He is known for his live streams, which are full of foul-mouthed and hypermasculine commentary. He had previously spoken out against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and criticized Taiwanese who “enjoy the freedom in Taiwan, but want China’s money”
A high-school student surnamed Yang (楊) gained admissions to several prestigious medical schools recently. However, when Yang shared his “learning portfolio” on social media, he was caught exaggerating and even falsifying content, and his admissions were revoked. Now he has to take the “advanced subjects test” scheduled for next month. With his outstanding performance in the general scholastic ability test (GSAT), Yang successfully gained admissions to five prestigious medical schools. However, his university dreams have now been frustrated by the “flaws” in his learning portfolio. This is a wake-up call not only for students, but also teachers. Yang did make a big