Taiwan-US ties
On Friday last week, the Brookings Institution’s Center for East Asia Policy Studies (CEAPS) and the Association of Foreign Relations co-hosted a public conference with three panels: Opportunities and challenges in cross-strait relations; opportunities and challenges under new conditions in mainland China; and Washington-Taipei-Beijing relations.
Center director, senior fellow of the Brookings Institution and former American Institute in Tawain (AIT) chairman Richard Bush was one of the panelists in the third panel.
Bush spoke about Washington’s purported involvement in Taiwan’s 2012 presidential election, in which US President Barack Obama’s administration let its views be known by having an anonymous official give an interview to the Financial Times.
He also predicted Washington would declare a preference for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate because of continuing doubts about the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) cross-strait policies.
Of course, this is only Bush’s personal point of view, because he is not the incumbent chairman of the AIT. If AIT Chairman Raymond Burghardt said this, then it would have to be taken seriously.
Nevertheless, it is a very honest and friendly warning to the DPP: Whoever wants to run for president needs to pay close attention to US policy and interests.
What is in the US’ best interests in the west Pacific? What kind of presidential candidate is expected by the US?
Peace, stability and prosperity are what the US wants in the west Pacific.
Although the US will try to prevent any unnecessary conflict between China and Taiwan, it will never give up its determination to defend the security of East Asia and the South China Sea.
On March 28, when US National Security Council Senior Director for Asian Affairs Evan Medeiros made his closing remarks at a Brookings Institution seminar to mark 35 years of US-People’s Republic of China relations, he also mentioned the 35th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act and accused Beijing of having made a false statement about Obama changing his Taiwan policy at his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) at The Hague, Netherlands. He said that was unhealthy and benefited nobody.
DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) visited the US’ Capitol Hill on Sept. 15, 2011, in her capacity as the DPP’s presidential candidate and was presented with a US national flag, but she seemed not to know what it meant to her.
Tsai repeatedly stressed that “Taiwan is the ROC [Republic of China] and the ROC is Taiwan,” which obviously conflicted with US- Taiwan policy.
If Tsai insists that Taiwan is the ROC, then the US would rather put its trust in President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to secure US interests.
Unfortunately, Ma has gone too far in relying on China.
In June, former US secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton warned Ma about this. She said Ma’s push for closer cross-strait ties could lead to Taiwan losing its economic and political independence and becoming vulnerable to over-reliance on China.
Taiwan is one of the most important factors in the US’ containment strategy against China, and the US wants to obtain strategic benefits from it. Taiwan must evaluate how far it is willing to open up to China.
Unfortunately, Ma tirelessly pushing the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), the service trade agreement and the trade in goods agreement opens wide Taiwan’s economy to China and ignores China dumping its inferior products, such as gutter oil through Hong Kong onto Taiwan.
Due to Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) firm anti-communist stance, the US trusted and supported the KMT for years.
In April 1950, then-US president Harry Truman approved a secret plan of action in the Golden Triangle proposed by the CIA’s Office of Policy Co-ordination to aid the 93rd Division, followed by an invasion of Yunnan Province by General Li Mi (李彌). Even the US Department of State was at the time not aware of “Operation X” at that time, which ended in failure.
The 2016 election is not far away, at which time the White House’s Oval Office and Taipei’s Presidential Office will have their new bosses.
Washington has not been quiet, as pointed out by Bush. There is a need for the public to express its views on how its interests will be affected by Taiwan’s elections.
In Taiwan, whoever is running for president must fully understand the nation’s status and where the country is heading under the “status quo.”
John Hsieh
Hayward, California
US, KMT strange bedfellows
“Politics makes strange bedfellows.”
“Keep your friends close but your enemies closer.”
“Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.”
As a US citizen, pardon my profound embarrassment at the strange behavior of the US government.
The world’s greatest democracy is paralyzed by what it perceives as political “necessity.”
Up is down, black is white, light is dark, good is bad and bad is good.
Former American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) chairman Richard Bush, promoting his new book on cross-strait issues, let drop a bombshell of sorts by revealing what everyone already knew, that the US has subtly favored the political party in Taiwan that does more to preserve the “status quo.”
For the US, the “status quo” means Taiwan being stuck in limbo, isolated from the international community because of China’s blackmail, and unable to stand up free and sovereign.
In the rest of the world, democracy is the US’ stated goal. In the Taiwan Strait, democracy is a sort of dirty word for US presidents where hints of liberty, freedom of speech and independence are concerned.
For the US, the “status quo” means neither here nor there, but for six years, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has definitely been navigating Taiwan toward “there.”
The US has long had a spotty record of supporting the strangest political allies around the world (the list is too long — they say politics makes strange bedfellows — behold arming the Taliban against the Soviets, talking nicely to Iran about the Islamic State or to China about the Islamic State or to Russia or even, heaven forbid, to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad).
It has been known for some time that fighting wars, conflicts and political battles in other places has kept the US too busy to pay much attention to Chinese hegemony.
Instead, the US peeks over at Taiwan every so often to see that the “status quo” is intact.
For the US, the “status quo” in Taiwan means not having to directly confront China. A war avoided is a war won.
In the topsy-turvy world of politics, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), a man dedicated to the independence and sovereignty of Taiwan, was considered a “troublemaker,” not only by China, but by the KMT and the US, to the extent that means joining the ranks of Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King or others who dedicated themselves to lofty ideals such as freedom, liberty and democracy — it is worthy company.
That Chen finds himself rotting in a prison cell unfortunately should also be no surprise. That too seems to go with the territory.
In his letter to the Taipei Times (Letter, Sept. 16, page 8), Dave Hall wonders how it is possible the US would support the KMT in the 2016 election, a party dead set against the nation’s sovereignty, and drawing Taiwan ever closer into China’s orbit.
It is a reasonable question.
In US geopolitical terms, avoiding direct confrontation between nuclear powers holds top priority.
Of course, China becomes agitated at any suggestion Taiwan is not part of China.
However, the US Congress seems to have no doubts Taiwan is not part of China.
How tragic then that the president must follow some unspoken protocol and pretend there is “one China,” and that policy somehow prevents the US from treating Taiwan like the vibrant, thriving, complicated, confusing, brilliant and at times raucous democracy it is.
As I said at the outset: Up is down and night is day.
Mr Hall refers to former US secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton as a possible presidential candidate who has pointed out that Taiwan is better off distancing itself from China.
However, as everybody is well aware, the distance from the soapbox to the Oval Office has its way of perverting stances previously taken.
My point of view is that Taiwanese self-determination must come from within the nation first, until the voices supporting sovereignty become a roar, rather than a squeak.
Sitting in the shadow of totalitarian Beijing, just a stone’s throw from thousands of missiles, has quelled the noise, but it is necessary to remind Beijing often that there is an unwilling people across the Strait, and that the KMT does not speak for what Taiwan yearns for.
Bush has revealed that there are those in the US manipulating the machinery of global politics secretly like the Wizard of Oz, hiding behind the curtain, saying one thing out loud, but supporting the opposite elsewhere.
In Taiwan, the KMT clings to its totalitarian past, while speaking with a forked tongue about a supposed love of the nation and its democracy. Like in Beijing, for the KMT, the only good democracy is one completely controlled by the KMT.
An ally like democratic Taiwan should be welcomed by the US as an example of the future of world governments, with a system of the people, by the people and for the people.
While so much attention is devoted to dysfunctional areas around the world where democracy is but a whisper in the wind, Taiwan is an example of how the true spirit of Lincoln’s words can be realized through rational society, hard work, education and creativity, dialogue amongst the people, love of country and love of liberty.
It is about time the US opened the door and let Taiwan in. No one better or more deserving will ever come knocking.
Lee Long-hwa
Los Angeles, California
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath