The US presidential election in November is rapidly approaching and the two major US parties are in the middle of their national conventions.
The Republicans just held their convention in rain-swept Tampa, Florida, and nominated Mitt Romney, while the Democrats met this week in Charlotte, North Carolina.
For Taiwan, these conventions are an opportunity to get a closer look at the political trends in the US, while the two parties use the occasion to elaborate on the policies they would implement if they win the elections.
The political platforms presented at the conventions do give an indication of the political inclinations of the two candidates and their parties.
How have the respective platforms to the two parties evolved over the years?
The Republican platform has always been more extensive, saluting the people of Taiwan for their democracy and economic model, and emphasizing that the relations are based on the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA).
A welcome new element this year is the phrase: “The US and Taiwan are united in our shared belief in fair elections, personal liberty and free enterprise.”
The Republican Party platform also reiterates statements from previous years that Taiwan’s future must be resolved peacefully and through dialogue, and it must be agreeable to the people of Taiwan.
It does warn that if China violates those principles, the US would help Taiwan defend itself in accord with the TRA.
Currently, the Democratic Party platform is rather bland and disappointing: “We are committed to a ‘one China’ policy and the Taiwan Relations Act, and will continue to support a peaceful resolution of cross-strait issues that is consistent with the wishes and best interests of the people of Taiwan.”
The problem with this statement is that it refers to an anachronistic “one China” concept dating back to the 1970s. Taiwan was not a democracy at the time. It was ruled by a Chinese Nationalist government which had come from China and maintained the pretense that it represents China.
Times have changed and Taiwan is now a democracy representing the people of Taiwan. The US should change accordingly and talk about a “one China, one Taiwan” policy.
The “one China” policy that the US has followed since the 1970s breeds instability in the Taiwan Strait by sending ambiguous signals to both the US’ allies and rivals.
The cumulative result of the “one China” policy practiced over successive US administrations has been to box the people of Taiwan into a state of perpetual political limbo, while emboldening the autocratic regime across the Strait to expand its military capacity at a rate that is unsettling to all of its neighbors.
Given the momentous changes that have occurred both within and outside of Taiwan over recent decades, it is time for Washington to formulate a new vision for relations with Taiwan, one that rests more firmly on the values of democracy and freedom which we share with the Taiwanese people.
The US must now adopt a “one China, one Taiwan” policy to make it clear that the future of Taiwan cannot be negotiated over the heads of its people, but rather should be determined by the people of Taiwan, through a referendum or other democratic mechanism.
That is what democracy and self-determination are all about, and those are the values both the people in the US and Taiwan hold dear.
Nat Bellocchi served as chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1990 through 1995. The views expressed in this article are his own.
President William Lai (賴清德) attended a dinner held by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) when representatives from the group visited Taiwan in October. In a speech at the event, Lai highlighted similarities in the geopolitical challenges faced by Israel and Taiwan, saying that the two countries “stand on the front line against authoritarianism.” Lai noted how Taiwan had “immediately condemned” the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas and had provided humanitarian aid. Lai was heavily criticized from some quarters for standing with AIPAC and Israel. On Nov. 4, the Taipei Times published an opinion article (“Speak out on the
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
News about expanding security cooperation between Israel and Taiwan, including the visits of Deputy Minister of National Defense Po Horng-huei (柏鴻輝) in September and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Francois Wu (吳志中) this month, as well as growing ties in areas such as missile defense and cybersecurity, should not be viewed as isolated events. The emphasis on missile defense, including Taiwan’s newly introduced T-Dome project, is simply the most visible sign of a deeper trend that has been taking shape quietly over the past two to three years. Taipei is seeking to expand security and defense cooperation with Israel, something officials
“Can you tell me where the time and motivation will come from to get students to improve their English proficiency in four years of university?” The teacher’s question — not accusatory, just slightly exasperated — was directed at the panelists at the end of a recent conference on English language learning at Taiwanese universities. Perhaps thankfully for the professors on stage, her question was too big for the five minutes remaining. However, it hung over the venue like an ominous cloud on an otherwise sunny-skies day of research into English as a medium of instruction and the government’s Bilingual Nation 2030