Print

Mail

wiki links

KURT CAMPBELL ON TAIWAN: Change is hard in Taiwan and US

‘While the US election is still months away, the victors in both Taiwan and ultimately in the US are likely to confront a very similar set of strategic challenges: the difficulties democracies inevitably face when they attempt to shift course dramatically after an election.’

That the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was elected to be the next president reflects a deep and profound interest in political change among the body politic.

There is a palpable sense of fatigue and dissatisfaction with the policies of outgoing President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and a desire for a change in direction both in policies toward China on the one hand and the US on the other.

Despite the obvious differences between Taiwan and the US, there is also a deep desire for change in the US and a corollary deep unhappiness with many of the policies of the administration of US President George W. Bush — from Iraq, to the economy, to the larger conduct of US foreign policy.

While the US election is still months away, the victors in both Taiwan and ultimately in the US are likely to confront a very similar set of strategic challenges: the difficulties democracies inevitably face when they attempt to shift course dramatically after an election.

For the US, the momentum in favor of continuity is all too obvious. Just picking up and leaving Iraq would be deeply problematic and there are powerful reasons for the US to retain a high degree of independence — sometimes referred to as unilateralism — in the conduct of its foreign policy and national security focus. Of course, there can and probably will be changes in US positions on issues like torture policy and the military base at Guantanamo Bay, but there are also likely to be a number of areas where continuity will be the order of the day. If the Democrats win the US electoral contest, such an outcome will be seen by many as disappointing.

A similar process may also be under way in Taiwan. Although Ma has made abrupt change from the “status quo” in its current form a key part of his campaign strategy, in certain areas it will be difficult to achieve the kind of profound change that he advertised during his campaign.

Ma has made it amply clear that he wants a fundamentally better formal relationship between Taiwan and China. Ma has articulated a perfectly reasonable set of guidelines for how to conduct economic and political relations with Beijing that should, at least in theory, be far more welcome to China. However, in recent years, China’s cross-strait policy has been notable for its lack of flexibility.

It is not clear whether China’s secretive leaders are prepared to take a variation on “yes” for an answer, particularly after the most recent upheavals in Tibet. Chinese leaders and diplomats have not demonstrated any facility for flexibility when it comes to Taiwan lately and there are indications that at least some of the key actors in the Politburo would prefer to keep the pressure on Taiwan.

Ma and his associates probably anticipate at least some of the diplomatic stubbornness that likely lies ahead in relations with China, but he will probably be surprised by an unfortunate continuity in US policy toward Taiwan.

As is well known, Taiwan-US relations have hit a low point in recent years and there are broad hopes in some quarters that under Ma’s administration, Taiwan-US relations will revive — perhaps even substantially. However, too much is made of the role that Chen played in the recent downturn in relations. The truth is, despite the fact that most of the blame for current troubles was placed on Chen and his advisers, the US shares the responsibility.

Like on most other issues of real consequence in foreign policy, the Bush team has been far from united on the issue of Taiwan.

Unhappiness with Chen has served to disguise disagreement among senior US policymakers and a general hardening of views about Taiwan.

A desire to avoid problems with China given US preoccupations and difficulties elsewhere is palpable in US thinking.

Privately, the incoming policymakers in Taiwan are hoping for a better relationship with Washington, including higher level contacts, public acknowledgement and appreciation for Taiwan’s contributions, and even overt military planning in the case of contingencies. However, it’s far from clear whether the Bush administration wants much beyond Taiwanese quiescence in its actions and utterances.

It is possible that despite Taiwanese hopes for better relations with Washington and Beijing there are powerful forces that favor a certain degree of continuity in these key relationships.

This turn of events is likely to be deeply discouraging for Taiwan. The hope, however, is that leaders in Beijing and Washington will appreciate the significance of the outcome of the Taiwanese presidential election and will take full advantage of the opportunities that lie ahead.

Kurt Campbell is the chief executive officer & cofounder; cofounder of Center for a New American Security.