It is commendable that US President Barack Obama pressed Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) on human rights during Hu’s recent visit to the US, compelling him to state China’s commitment to human rights even as the two countries have different national circumstances.
Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the new chairwoman of the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs, is to be praised for personally pressing Hu to improve “China’s deplorable human rights situation.”
However, at a luncheon for businessmen on Jan. 20, Hu declared that “Taiwan and Tibet concern China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and represent China’s core interest,” meaning they are core Chinese territory.
Hu’s statement is a grave violation of the Taiwanese people’s human rights in that it disregards their right to determine their country’s future as guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 1), by the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Article 1), by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 1) and by former US president Ronald Reagan’s 1982 assurance to Taiwan.
It ignores the undetermined international status of Taiwan, in as much as Japan, which ruled Taiwan for 50 years after China ceded it in the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki, “renounced all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores” in the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, but that document said nothing about to which country it ceded those territories (Treaty of Peace with Japan, Article 2b). That effectively left the treaty status of Taiwan undecided. Former US president Harry Truman and former British prime minister Anthony Eden also considered Taiwan’s international status undetermined.
Furthermore, as recently as August 2007, Dennis Wilder, former US president George W. Bush’s National Security Council senior director for Asian Affairs, said “Taiwan, or the Republic of China (ROC), is not a state in the international community and that the position of the US government is that the ROC is an issue undecided and it has been left undecided for many, many years.”
Hu’s statement runs counter to both the US’ “one China” policy and the principles of the three US-China joint communiques, to which the US abides, according to Obama. The US’ “one China” policy means there is only one China, but does not signify recognition of China’s claim that Taiwan is China’s core interest. In the February 1972 communique, the US acknowledged China’s position that “all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain that there is one China and Taiwan is part of China,” but did not state the US’ position on Taiwan’s sovereignty or ultimate status. The January 1979 communique, establishing diplomatic relations between the US and the People’s Republic of China, and the August 1982 communique, dealing with US arms sales to Taiwan, maintain the same position.
More importantly, US acceptance of Hu’s statement that Taiwan is a Chinese core interest will endanger the freedom of the sea and US commercial and security interests in East Asia and the Western Pacific. As last year’s US Secretary of Defense Report to Congress points out, “China’s long-term, comprehensive transformation of its military forces is improving its capacity for force projection and anti-access and area denial,” in other words force projection to the second island chain half-way to Hawaii and denial of US access to the East, South and Southeast Asian region. It could threaten not only US interests, but the “peace, security and stability of the Western Pacific — a danger to US policy,” according to the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), US Public Law 96-8 (TRA, Sec 2a), the third foundation of US-China policy.
Obama is urged to carry out his legal obligation, namely, “the preservation and enhancement of the human rights of the people of Taiwan” (TRA, Sec 2c). He should oppose Hu’s statement that Taiwan is a Chinese core interest. He is obligated to strengthen the US’ Asian interests and to declare that Taiwan is not a part of China, that “the preservation and enhancement of the human rights of the people of Taiwan are objectives of the US” and that the US will “make available to Taiwan such defense articles and defense services to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability” (TRA, Sec 3a).
Alexander Young is a professor emeritus of international relations at the State University of New York.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS