The US Congress in the past few years has passed legislation in support of Taiwan, including “an act to direct the [US] Secretary of State to develop a strategy to obtain observer status for Taiwan in the International Criminal Police Organization [Interpol] and for other purposes” and the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 providing for military exchanges between Taiwan and the US.
The Taiwan Travel Act bill is the latest addition to this legislative drive. Taiwanese officials and the public have embraced this development with enthusiasm.
In the public eye, this is a welcome development, as it apparently affirms the US’ commitment to Taiwan time and again. Yet, in the eye of a constitutional law student, these congressional acts should be treated with caution.
To begin with, all the foregoing congressional statutes are more symbolic than transformative. In terms of style, they consist of two main parts: The first sets out the factual findings by Congress; the second and main part provides for policy direction.
It is the second part that merits attention. Apart from the legislation on Taiwan’s participation in Interpol, the other two legal instruments imply no legal obligation whatsoever in their main section. Instead, Congress deliberately chose the word “should” instead of “shall” when it comes to visits between US and Taiwanese officials.
As any law student can instantly tell, “should” simply expresses the subjective expectation of Congress. It only imposes moral obligations on the US administration at best, lacking any enforceability or justiciability.
It is true that the legislation on Taiwan’s participation in Interpol adopts the wording “shall,” which denotes a congressional directive to the government, but the legal obligations imposed by Congress are flimsy.
The US government’s main duty is to report back to Congress what strategy it develops and adopts with respect to Taiwan’s participation in Interpol as an observer, as well as “instruct[ing]” Washington’s Metropolitan Police Department to “officially request” that Interpol consider the matter.
It is not hard to see why Congress has legislated in support of Taiwan in this thinned form. The US adheres to the principle of separation of powers, not the doctrine of legislative sovereignty. It is the executive branch that takes the helm in steering foreign affairs.
The US Constitution prohibits Congress from micromanaging military administration and diplomatic relations, not to mention sending military delegations overseas or receiving foreign government visitors. This explains why “should” is chosen over “shall” in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 and the Taiwan Travel Act bill.
Taiwanese officials and the public had better exercise caution when they welcome the recent US Congress-driven Taiwan-friendly movement. Friends of Taiwan also need to think about how to better spend their capital in the advocacy for Taiwan. Preoccupation with legislative symbolism will only deepen the false sense of security pervading Taiwanese society.
Kuo Ming-Sung is an associate professor at the University of Warwick’s School of Law.
Weeks into the craze, nobody quite knows what to make of the OpenClaw mania sweeping China, marked by viral photos of retirees lining up for installation events and users gathering in red claw hats. The queues and cosplay inspired by the “raising a lobster” trend make for irresistible China clickbait. However, the West is fixating on the least important part of the story. As a consumer craze, OpenClaw — the AI agent designed to do tasks on a user’s behalf — would likely burn out. Without some developer background, it is too glitchy and technically awkward for true mainstream adoption,
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
A delegation of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) officials led by Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is to travel to China tomorrow for a six-day visit to Jiangsu, Shanghai and Beijing, which might end with a meeting between Cheng and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). The trip was announced by Xinhua news agency on Monday last week, which cited China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) Director Song Tao (宋濤) as saying that Cheng has repeatedly expressed willingness to visit China, and that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee and Xi have extended an invitation. Although some people have been speculating about a potential Xi-Cheng
RSS