Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is visiting Washington.
The good news is she knew in advance all of the questions the White House would be asking. The bad news is she is not sure either what or how to answer.
She is definitely walking a tightrope and is determined not to repeat the failure and underperformance during her previous trip in September 2011. Like a person being rescued in a deep sea diving bell, she is experiencing high pressure from all sides.
Beijing is trying to chain her to a fictitious so-called “1992 consensus,” which is neither a treaty nor a declaration with legal binding force. The “1992 consensus,” a term former Mainland Affairs Council chairman Su Chi (蘇起) admitted to having made up in 2000, refers to a tacit agreement between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese government that both sides acknowledge there is “one China,” with each side having its own interpretation of what “China” means.
Washington is demanding an assurance of non-independence for Taiwan if she is elected.
To placate both Beijing and Washington, Tsai spoke of “maintaining the status quo.” It was an utter miscalculation on her part.
If she could pacify all parties with a four-word statement, then she would not have to cross the Pacific Ocean simply to deliver the same sentence — a verbiage with zero substance.
Only a fool believes in the status quo, because there is none.
A leader believes in trading interests through strength.
China does not see a boiling Taiwan Strait in its imminent interest. Beijing figures it is actually much less expensive to literally buy up Taipei with overwhelming economic coercion than one of military force.
As for the US, considering that Taiwan is still its protectorate and understanding well what military value the nation holds, the White House is to, for the foreseeable future, deny Taiwan any notion of de jure independence.
As Taiwan is a quasi-state that needs some form of defense, the US considers the nation a consumer supporting its critical military industrial complex. Every president who has sat in the Oval Office has clearly seen the military significance and economic benefits Taiwan’s situation offers.
By the same token, Japan, with its tangle of historical wounds yet to be resolved with China, would definitely not accept the Taiwan Strait becoming China’s territorial water, nor would it tolerate the sea lane becoming impassable. To some extent, Japan’s position is more favorable toward Taiwan.
Squeezed by all interest parties, Tsai is given a very weak hand to play and not much wiggle room.
It would be wise to conjure up two buckets: one for national security and pride, and the other for domestic economic matters.
Tsai might already realize with profound pain that she cannot dip her hand in bucket one.
In effect, she is left only with the second.
Whatever the US asks for that does not belong in bucket two, Tsai should just hand over bucket one with a single statement: “That is your problem.”
It is very painful to be a Taiwanese leader. Is it not?
Kengchi Goah is a senior research fellow at the Taiwan Public Policy Council in the US.
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with