Taiwan may not have official diplomatic ties with the US, but this shouldn't mean that Taiwan's president, or his successor next year, should be treated with any less respect by US officials.
A quick assessment of American Institute in Taiwan Chairman Raymond Burghardt's comments during his visit to Taipei this week demonstrates that the US government still has much to learn about showing respect to the president of a democracy.
Burghardt regurgitated Washington's opposition to the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) referendum on joining the UN under the name "Taiwan" and expressed the US administration's concerns over the consequences of a successful referendum for cross-strait stability during his meeting with President Chen Shui-bian (
After telling local reporters on Monday that "all it [the referendum] does is cause trouble," Burghardt -- in an overtly condescending manner -- told Chen that what the latter had said and done with the referendum could "harm the new president's ability to get off on the right foot." He added that the referendum would not only make things difficult for the next president but make things even more complicated if it passes.
Just because Taiwan lacks official diplomatic ties with the US and is not recognized as a state by the UN does not give Burghardt license to lecture Chen on what he should and should not do, nor draw red lines for the next president on how he should proceed on cross-strait policy.
Even if the referendum does pass in January it would only be a reflection of the people's will to see Taiwan join the UN under the name "Taiwan." One therefore wonders why it should be so offensive for a president to follow the will of the people who elected him.
Burghardt said the result of the referendum would not change Washington's "one China" policy. That's fine, for Taiwan is an independent state with its own territory and currency and a government that is answerable only to Taiwanese.
The referendum is not an attempt to influence US policy.
The US government has often complained about Chen springing surprises on Washington by making sudden announcements and that the DPP administration has failed to understand US policy. Granted, Chen has a tendency to make extemporary remarks that warrant more care.
But beyond that, the lack of official diplomatic links -- and the calisthenics that this situation has forced Taiwanese diplomats to perform just to talk to their US counterparts -- is the principal reason why Taipei hasn't been able to "get" US policy. Give us direct access and all that ambiguity, all those misunderstandings, will vanish.
Taiwan cherishes and takes very seriously its relationship with the US.
But by the same token, the US should respect Taiwan and let its elected president do his job -- represent Taiwanese and work for their collective good.
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