IN THE MIDDLE of World War II, British prime minister Winston Churchill said: "You can always rely on the Americans to do the right thing -- after they have exhausted all other options."
He was expressing his exasperation with US zigzagging and idiosyncrasies in the fight against Nazi Germany and Japan.
We are similarly exasperated with recent statements by US officials opposing a referendum to enter the UN under the name Taiwan.
On Dec. 6, Deputy Assistant US Secretary of State Thomas Christensen reiterated his opposition to the referendum, while a few days later, American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Chairman Ray Burghardt made similar statements during a visit to Taipei.
These statements are undermining democracy in Taiwan and are playing into China's hands. As an organization of US citizens of Taiwanese descent we find this unacceptable.
The statements undermine democracy because they go against the fundamental principle of self-determination: People have the right to express their views on major issues that affect their future.
Taiwan has a very special history because after World War II it was occupied by the losing side of the Chinese Civil War. But after Taiwan's remarkable transition to democracy, it is now a free nation that wants to be a full and equal member in the international family of nations.
The US opposition to the referendum also goes against the grain of the basic US principles of democracy and human rights, which are enshrined in the US Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" are universal values that the people of Taiwan cherish as much as Americans.
The statements by Christensen and Burghardt are also antithetical to keeping a level playing field in Taiwan.
By singling out the Democratic Progressive Party's referendum and not saying anything about a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) referendum -- which also supports joining the UN -- Christensen and Burghardt are taking sides in an internal Taiwanese debate and are influencing the election campaign. No doubt their statements will be played up by the pan-blue press.
In opposing the referendum, the US officials are regrettably doing the bidding of the authoritarian leaders of China. Beijing long ago learned that the shortest way to Taipei is through Washington and is now manipulating the US into trying to "control" Taiwan.
In spite of US denials, it is letting itself be used to "co-manage" Taiwan.
Of course, China does not like the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-sponsored referendum, but this vote would not disturb peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. It should be clear to our friends in the State Department and the White House that China's military threats against Taiwan and its relentless campaign to isolate Taiwan internationally are the real sources of tension and instability.
The purpose of the DPP's referendum is threefold. It would let the international community know that Taiwanese have no intention of letting themselves be subdued by the authoritarian regime in Beijing, and that the Taiwanese want their country to be a full and equal member in the international community. It would also counter China's relentless pressure to isolate Taiwan.
Christensen and Burghardt also made statements to the effect that they want to stick to the faulty and outdated "one China" policy.
We would like to quote one of Burghardt's own statements: "One of the wonderful things about democracy is that when new leaders come in, the new leaders present a new opportunity."
We certainly hope that when a new leader comes into power in Washington, he or she will see fit to ditch the anachronistic "one China" policy and replace it with a pragmatic policy based on the reality that Taiwan is a free and democratic nation in its own right.
In the meantime, we of course hope that the administration of US President George W. Bush will be sensible and rational on the issue of the DPP's referendum, and not overreact. For the time being, it should remain quiet on the issue and let democracy in Taiwan take its course.
After everything is said and done, the US should follow Churchill's advice: Do the right thing and support Taiwan's membership in international organizations.
Chen Wen-yen is executive director of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs, a Taiwanese-American organization based in Washington.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry