Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) wrapped up her recent tour of the US. Largely because of Washington’s high expectations for Tsai’s cross-strait policy, as well as the fact that she is the first DPP presidential candidate who can speak fluent English, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), sent his campaign director, King Pu-tsung (金溥聰), to Washington to “balance” Tsai’s trip. Facing electoral maneuvering by both parties, US President Barack Obama’s administration, on the surface, tried to remain unbiased, while influencing Taiwan’s elections in a subtle way.
In terms of “image-building,” “message delivering” and “public diplomacy,” Tsai achieved her goals. First, she highlighted differences between her and her DPP predecessor, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), by recognizing strategic divergences between Taiwan and Washington during the Chen era and emphasizing the need to rebuild trust and construct a partnership. She also pledged that future DPP cross-strait policy would be stable and balanced.
Second, Tsai distinguished her leadership from Ma’s by stressing her ability to work closer with US allies in the region and determination to take strong action to defend Taiwan.
Finally, and most importantly, Tsai dismissed the notion of the so-called “1992 consensus” as a fabricated concept and suggested replacing it with a “Taiwan consensus” arrived at democratically. She also pledged to continue the agreements reached by the Ma administration and its Chinese counterparts, provided Taiwan remains able to re--examine their pros and cons.
Nevertheless, Tsai encountered numerous challenges, particularly in her meetings with officials from the Obama administration and think tank experts. The major concern for the Washington establishment is the substance of Tsai’s theory of building up a “Taiwan consensus” if she wins. While Tsai talked of the process of generating such a consensus, the US expected more detailed elaboration.
Another worry is a fear that Tsai might misjudge Beijing’s willingness to work with a possible new DPP government. Though it is reasonable for Tsai to refrain from revealing her hand when Beijing has yet to show its cards, Washington anticipates a more concrete agenda behind Tsai’s cross-strait policy that could ensure a continuation of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.
That explains why, after Tsai left Washington, a story in the Financial Times sparked a political fire.
The story quoted an anonymous senior US official, who attended a meeting with Tsai, as saying that “she left us with distinct doubts about whether she is both willing and able to continue the stability in cross-strait relations the region has enjoyed in recent years.”
Despite the US State Department’s immediate clarification that “the ‘official’ mentioned in the article is totally unknown to us and certainly does not speak for the Obama administration,” the episode demonstrated a divergence in views from different US agencies when evaluating Tsai’s cross-strait policy. And this faction tends to use the media to spin the news to influence Taiwan’s elections indirectly.
Coincidentally, the Obama administration sent US Assistant Secretary of Commerce Suresh Kumar, the highest US official to visit Taiwan in the past nine years, to Taipei while Tsai was visiting Washington. The timing of Kumar’s visit was also politically sensitive given that the presidential election is heating up in Taiwan.
Although the US administration said it does not take sides in Taiwan’s elections, such ambiguous and inappropriate interference in Taiwan’s domestic politics runs the risk of jeopardizing a fair, open and democratic electoral process in the upcoming elections.
There is no doubt that Washington often plays a pivotal role in influencing public opinion in Taiwan. Former US president George W. Bush’s administration used a series of open statements by high-ranking officials, including former US president George H.W. Bush, to warn the DPP government about the likely dangers of holding referendums prior to the presidential elections in 2004 and 2008. Beijing was no doubt behind the US’ verbal and diplomatic pressures on the Chen administration.
It is therefore not surprising to see some US officials duplicating that strategy to force Tsai to unveil more details about her cross-strait policy or to make clear “strategic reassurances” to Washington as the election approaches.
No matter whether it comes from a lack of internal coordination between different US agencies or if the Obama administration intends to help Ma get re-elected, such moves sabotage Taiwan’s hard-won democracy. The US should be neutral and not intervene in Taiwan’s elections, as well as ensuring a successful transition of power in January were Tsai to win.
Liu Shih-chung is a senior research fellow at the Taipei-based Taiwan Brain Trust.
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,