During his first visit to Asia as US president, Barack Obama issued a joint statement with Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤). References to Taiwan in the statement suggest that the situation is evolving in a direction unfavorable to the country. In view of this, the government of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) should immediately seek clarification from Washington and try to remedy the situation.
There are several points to which Taiwan should pay attention. In his speeches in Japan, Obama did not mention Taiwan at all. At his “town hall” meeting in Shanghai, he only mentioned the three US-China joint communiques and avoided the issues of China’s military threat and US arms sales. At the press conference following his meeting with Hu, although he mentioned the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) in the same sentence as the three joint communiques, he also talked about respect for China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The joint statement itself makes no mention of the TRA, while the two countries’ respect for one another’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is stated twice, as well as a wish for the two sides of the Taiwan Strait to “increase dialogues and interactions in economic, political, and other fields.”
The TRA provides the legal basis for US policy on Taiwan. Section 4 of the Act states that, despite the absence of diplomatic relations between the US and Taiwan, “Whenever the laws of the United States refer or relate to foreign countries, nations, states, governments, or similar entities, such terms shall include and such laws shall apply with such respect to Taiwan.”
This amounts to regarding Taiwan as a de facto independent state. The six assurances delivered to president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) in 1982 by then-director of the American Institute in Taiwan James Lilley on behalf of US president Ronald Reagan included the point that the US had not altered its position regarding sovereignty over Taiwan, implying that it did not recognize China’s claim of sovereignty over Taiwan. These assurances, along with the TRA, are the most important foundations for the maintenance of Taiwan-US relations.
However, the Obama-Hu joint statement says: “China emphasized that the Taiwan issue concerns China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity ... [The US and China] reiterated that the fundamental principle of respect for each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is at the core of the three US-China joint communiques which guide US-China relations. Neither side supports any attempts by any force to undermine this principle.”
The wording of the joint statement clearly departs from what is mandated by the TRA, as well as the spirit of Reagan’s six assurances. While Taiwan has in the past been viewed as a de facto sovereign independent state, the wording of the joint statement shows that its status is now being seriously challenged.
In view of this, it is very sad to see Ma happily claiming that Taiwan-US relations are better than they have been in 60 years and that mutual trust between the countries has been completely restored.
Besides, before the Obama-Hu talks, the Chinese side privately expressed the wish that the US would support dialogue across the Taiwan Strait. China wants US approval for the six points Hu proposed on the Taiwan issue on New Year’s Eve last year, which seek by hook or by crook to confine Taiwan within a “one China” framework. It wants to create an environment of cross-strait political consultation that would work in its own favor, and to reduce Taiwan’s maneuvering room.
Obviously this situation is not good for Taiwan.
The Obama-Hu talks have indeed been a big diplomatic victory for China. With regard to Taiwan, however, the Ma administration has accepted the idea of “one China.” At the same time, it is dismantling Taiwan’s strongest line of defense — its democracy. When so much has been given away, what grounds can we have for demanding that the US not accept China’s claim to sovereignty over Taiwan? Seemingly we are left with no choice but to swallow the bitter fruit of the Obama-Hu talks.
Joseph Wu is an adviser to the Taiwan Thinktank and a research fellow at the Institute of International Relations at National Chengchi University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
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