Liberals don’t like Asians. Asians are basically conservative: They don’t like big and intrusive government and despise high taxes and welfare. Asians espouse strong family values. They are not egalitarian.
When Asians are asked what they don’t like about the US, their top answer is affirmative action and quotas in college and university admission that grievously discriminate against Asians — core tenets of the liberal Democratic Party’s agenda.
US President Barack Obama is an uber-liberal, the most liberal US president ever. Hence the above view of Asians held by liberals applies to him even more. He is an enthusiastic advocate of expanding government, higher taxes and racial quotas.
Obama’s views of Asians are reflected in his administration’s Asia policy. Asia is neglected, which is of particular note given its fast growing economic, military and cultural importance. Obama prefers Europe. He spends most of his time dealing with Middle East issues.
Obama especially dislikes Taiwan. Following are the reasons and the evidence.
First, the reasons:
Obama has shown a level of disdain for his predecessor like no other president. Former US president George W. Bush liked Taiwan. In 2001, Bush said that he would “do whatever it took” to defend Taiwan. Although Bush experienced some serious differences with Taiwan when he was president, Democrats remember him for his defense of the Taiwan line.
Obama’s nemesis during the presidential campaign was Senator John McCain, who said unequivocally (in an article in Foreign Affairs) that he would, if elected president, employ US forces to defend Taiwan.
Of course, the “authoritarian, right-wing” Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) rules Taiwan. That is the party of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), which Democrats some decades ago demonized after Republicans assailed them for losing China (as it turns out, neither charge has stood the test of time, though Democrats hang on to the mantra and have no doubt cited it to Obama).
There is a history of Republicans liking and supporting Taiwan more than Democrats. Republicans have a greater affinity for Asia, which is conservative, than Democrats. They have considered Taiwan as a bastion of capitalism, democracy and freedom.
Second, the evidence:
Obama was barely in office when his administration proposed talks between top military brass from Taiwan and China. This denied a long-standing tenet of US policy and a promise to Taiwan not to mediate in cross-strait relations or pressure Taiwan to negotiate. Observers took this as a hint that the president favored unification not on Taiwan’s terms.
In 2009, when Obama made his first trip to China, he issued a formal written statement. In it he cited the Three Communiques as the basis of US-China-Taiwan policy. The communiques reflect US efforts to engineer better relations with China (at Taiwan’s expense). The president did not cite the Taiwan Relations Act (which is law, has a higher legal status than the communiques and protects Taiwan).
Similarly, Obama did not broach two topics that top US officials pro forma bring up during talks with Chinese leaders: democracy and human rights. Doing so would have put Taiwan in a good light.
Since Obama became president, no Cabinet or sub-Cabinet official has visited Taiwan and Taiwan has not featured in a speech by any senior administration official dealing with Asia policy, or so says US Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the new Republican chairperson of the House of Representatives’ Committee on Foreign Affairs. Ros-Lehtinen says Taiwan is an “afterthought” in the Obama administration, while citing a “new spirit of appeasement in the air.”
Obama’s top appointments mirror the view that China is important and deserves respect. The US debt to China is huge and growing. The new US Ambassador to China Gary Locke is Chinese, but has few, if any, Taiwan connections. His forte is economic issues; he has little experience in strategic matters (which might favor Taiwan).
The US-Taiwan Free Trade Agreement that has been proposed for some time is now a dead issue. Obama, responding to Republican pressure, has given conditional support to FTAs with three countries; but Taiwan is not among them.
Obama has cut US military spending by US$400 billon and has proposed further cuts of about the same amount. Meanwhile he is spending more on US involvement in the Middle East, which means US forces in the Far East will be cut and the US may no longer be able to protect Taiwan.
If the US forsakes its vows to protect Taiwan, it has no place to go. No other country and no international organization will help defend Taiwan. Obama may yet oversee the end of Taiwan as we know it.
John Copper is the Stanley J. Buckman professor of International Studies at Rhodes College in Memphis, Tennessee.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US