As US President Barack Obama visits Beijing this week to attend the annual APEC meeting, it is good to reflect on US relations with East Asia — and with Taiwan and China in particular.
Relations between the US and China are tense because of China’s increasing belligerence on a number of fronts: It has thrown its weight around in the South China Sea, making claims to large tracts of water within the “nine-dash line,” upsetting its neighbors; it has acted confrontational in the East China Sea vis-a-vis Japan on the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) — known as the Senkakus in Japan — while declaring an air defense identification zone over the region; it is increasingly repressive in Tibet and East Turkestan [Xinjiang], while it has mishandled the developments in Hong Kong by not living up to its promise of universal suffrage in the upcoming election of the chief executive in 2017.
In the meantime, relations between Taiwan and China still have the appearance of outward calm and stability. Cross-strait exchanges and negotiations are still going on, but are increasingly overshadowed by Beijing’s underlying political designs becoming obvious: It wants to incorporate Taiwan just like it incorporated Hong Kong in 1997. In a meeting with a visiting pro-“unification” delegation from Taiwan, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) said: “The ‘one country, two systems’ [policy] is the mainland’s guiding principle for resolving the Taiwan question and the best way to achieve national ‘reunification.’”
The problems with this statement are that the so-called “one country, two systems” policy has never had any traction in Taiwan and that China’s handling of the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong has shown Taiwanese that their hard-won freedoms would significantly diminish if the nation would continue to move in China’s direction. In other words, as I emphasized earlier, Hong Kong is a mirror for Taiwan (“Life in the KMT’s alternate reality,” Sept. 10, page 8).
So, against this background, what message should Obama carry to Beijing?
One, that the US will continue its forward presence in East Asia and that it will continue to support freedom, democracy and human rights. Those are the US’ “core interests.”
Two, that peace and stability in the region can be achieved only if China respects its neighbors and does not encroach on their territories and interests. Allowing neighbors such as Taiwan to determine their own futures would be in China’s own interests.
Three, that human rights in China are also a key variable in US-China relations: Violations in Tibet, East Turkestan and Hong Kong cannot be argued away as “internal affairs,” but must be on the front burner as essential elements in determining whether the US and China are on good terms with each other.
In the meantime, the US can do much more in enhancing relations with Taiwan: It should help create the much-needed space for Taiwanese to make a fully free choice on the future of their nation — without outside interference or pressure from China. It can do this by moving more aggressively to welcome Taiwan into the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). It can do this by removing some of the outdated, self-imposed guidelines that inhibit a more normal relationship between the US and Taiwan. And it can do this by being more supportive of Taiwan’s membership in international organizations.
Moving on all of these fronts would be a signal that the US truly supports freedom and democracy in East Asia.
Nat Bellocchi served as chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1990 through 1995. The views expressed in this article are his own.
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Former Fijian prime minister Mahendra Chaudhry spoke at the Yushan Forum in Taipei on Monday, saying that while global conflicts were causing economic strife in the world, Taiwan’s New Southbound Policy (NSP) serves as a stabilizing force in the Indo-Pacific region and offers strategic opportunities for small island nations such as Fiji, as well as support in the fields of public health, education, renewable energy and agricultural technology. Taiwan does not have official diplomatic relations with Fiji, but it is one of the small island nations covered by the NSP. Chaudhry said that Fiji, as a sovereign nation, should support