For many years it was an article of faith for the US to emphasize that in the Taiwan Strait it wanted the parties to adhere to the “status quo.” The main purpose of this was, of course, that the US wanted no change in a situation that has the potential to become a flashpoint. It was primarily directed at Beijing, counseling it to refrain from any aggressive moves against Taiwan.
However, during the administrations of former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), it was also used by the US to dampen initiatives that were perceived as “rocking the boat.”
Lee experienced significant pushback from Washington in July 1999 when in an interview with Deutsche Welle he defined Taiwan’s relations with China as “nation-to-nation relations,” while Chen got a decisively cold shoulder from then-president George W. Bush’s administration in August 2002 when he talked about “one country on each side.”
Fast-forwarding to the present, during the past few months China has been working hard to change the status quo in two different ways: On the one hand, it has become much more aggressive, throwing its weight around in the international arena on issues such as global warming, currency valuation and border disputes with neighbors, such as Japan over the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台). On the other hand, it has — through its “peace offensive” toward Taiwan, including some concessions on issues like the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) — gradually drawn Taiwan closer to itself, away from the US and other allies in the region.
While US President Barack Obama’s administration, to its credit, has moved to counter China’s expansionist designs in other regions in East Asia, notably the South China Sea, the Korean Peninsula and the fracas with Japan over the Diaoyutais, it seems nonplussed by the rapprochement between the old adversaries, the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
The US’ initial reaction was to applaud the “reduction of tension,” but it is gradually dawning on Washington that the present trend is leading to Taiwan becoming the weak link in the armor of democracy in East Asia.
Caught in the middle are Taiwanese, who worked hard to achieve a momentous transformation to democracy in the 1980s and 1990s, but who haven’t seen that being translated into acceptance as an equal by the international community. The reason Taiwan ran into this stone wall was not only bureaucratic inertia (“There has been a ‘one China’ policy for the past six administrations”) or China’s rise and influence, but precisely because of the status quo concept that seems so embedded in the minds of policymakers.
A status quo is by definition a temporary, unstable equilibrium. The US may not want to change it for a while in order to prevent a move (ie, by China) in the negative direction, but the US is a nation that is built on the concept of change, so it should applaud a change away from the status quo in the positive direction.
What might such a change be? If there were more acceptance in the international community of Taiwan’s existence as a free and democratic nation; if there were acceptance by China of Taiwan as a friendly neighbor instead of perpetuation of old claims that do not have any basis in present-day reality; if the people of Taiwan were really able to determine their own future freely, without more than 1,400 missiles pointed at their heads; that would be a change in the status quo all would warmly welcome.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
The fallout from the mass recalls and the referendum on restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant continues to monopolize the news. The general consensus is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been bloodied and found wanting, and is in need of reflection and a course correction if it is to avoid electoral defeat. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has not emerged unscathed, either, but has the opportunity of making a relatively clean break. That depends on who the party on Oct. 18 picks to replace outgoing KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). What is certain is that, with the dust settling
RSS