On Dec. 16, 1978, US president Jimmy Carter announced to the world that Washington would recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and establish formal diplomatic relations, effective Jan. 1, 1979. At the insistence of the PRC, the US government terminated its diplomatic relations with the Republic of China (ROC) and unilaterally nullified the US-ROC Mutual Defense Treaty.
Believing that the establishment of formal diplomatic relations between the US and the PRC should not be allowed to adversely affect existing de facto relations between the US and Taiwan, Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) on Apr. 10, 1979, as the legal basis for future US-Taiwan relations.
The TRA is a very special item of US domestic legislation. Since its enactment in 1979, it has played a vital role in consolidating US-Taiwan relations and preserving peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. With regard to maintaining Taiwan’s national security, the TRA obliges US governments to supply Taiwan with defensive weapons and states that the US will view with grave concern any effort to determine Taiwan’s future by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or embargoes, and will consider any such action to be a threat to the peace and security of the western Pacific region.
The establishment of diplomatic relations between the US and the PRC was a great shock for the people of Taiwan, but the TRA provided a stable environment for the island’s economic development, leading to Taiwan’s economic miracle.
The TRA has also facilitated Taiwan’s democratization and localization, through which it has evolved into a sovereign and independent nation neither subordinate to China nor having jurisdiction over it.
Throughout the 30 years that have passed since Carter’s announcement, the US has maintained a policy of “One China, but not now,” founded on the TRA and the three US-China joint communiques.
An important aspect of this policy is the insistence that Taiwan’s future can only be resolved by peaceful means.
Since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) took office in May this year, he has broken his election promises and gone against Taiwanese public opinion by moving rapidly in the direction of unification with his policy of leaning heavily toward China.
He has abandoned his predecessors’ positions of “state-to-state relations” and “one country on each side of the Taiwan Strait.”
His policies lead toward de-Taiwanization and away from Taiwan’s sovereignty. Stressing the idea that cross-strait relations are more important than diplomatic relations, Ma has called a diplomatic truce with China and seeks to create an illusory atmosphere of peace between the two countries on either side of the Strait.
This may give the international community the false impression that Taiwan is willing to become a part of the PRC.
The Ma government has adopted these pro-China policies with scant regard to the opinions and rights of the public, aiming to sign a peace accord with China that disregards the concerns of other interested parties.
These unilateral actions by Ma threaten to upset the long-standing “status quo” in cross-strait affairs.
What attitude Washington takes in response to these developments in Taiwan is a matter deserving of everyone’s attention.
Chen Lung-chu is president of the Taiwan New Century Foundation.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS