Not long ago, the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) published an article discussing the Taiwan Travel Act’s legal status, legislative speed and cross-party support in the US. As expected, after the bill moved from a US Senate committee to the Senate floor on Feb. 7, it was discussed and voted on within three weeks — passing unanimously — thus completing its passage through the US Congress.
Presented to the White House on March 5, US President Donald Trump is expected to sign it into law.
Because members of the US House of Representatives only serve two-year terms, if a bill does not complete the legislative process — clearing the House and Senate — within two years, it must start from the beginning in a new session.
An average of 15,000 bills are proposed in each session, but fewer than 5 percent make it to a Senate committee for discussion and a vote. The percentage of those passed into law on the Senate floor is even lower — the act making it through Congress was no forgone conclusion.
Some might wonder why the act was able to complete the legislative process in a quick 13 months.
FAPA in 2004 proposed a congressional resolution calling for the lifting of restrictions keeping top Taiwanese and US officials from visiting each other. In 2015, it continued the spirit of the resolution by proposing the act, lifting it to the legal status of a domestic law.
The “grassroots diplomacy” finally succeeded thanks to non-stop action over the past 14 years. The passing of the act by the Senate on Feb. 28 — the anniversary of the 228 Incident in Taiwan — had double significance.
Why did FAPA insist on pushing through the Taiwan Travel Act? People might not know that there are many unwritten restrictions in the US Department of State’s handling of Taiwan-US relations, including ones that treat Taiwan unfairly.
For example, then-Taipei mayor Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was in 1999 allowed to meet with members of the US Congress freely in Washington, but after Chen was elected president the next year, he was only allowed to transit through US cities designated by the department, and was warned not to meet with any Americans during transits.
At the time, like in the movies, a heavyweight US representative managed to reach Chen’s suite by taking the hotel’s freight elevator.
Similarly, during US transits, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) was told not to make her schedule public, leave her hotel at will or take any interviews with the Taiwanese media. The Taiwanese journalists who traveled with Tsai were not permitted to stay at her hotel. Nobody would believe that such poor treatment was given to Taiwan’s elected president — it was simply unfair.
After more than 10 years of effort, the act is a signature away from becoming law. Of course, this does not mean that Tsai can visit Washington right after Trump signs the bill.
However, the act has three implications: It will improve and normalize Taiwan-US relations; it will strengthen trust between the two nations; and the US will treat Taiwan more fairly.
The American Institute in Taiwan is set to open its new office building in Taipei’s Neihu District (內湖) in June, and optimism is high that the US will send a high-level delegation to the opening.
One day, maybe the Taiwanese president will walk into the White House or US Capitol Building on behalf of Taiwanese.
FAPA will not cease its efforts to promote Taiwan in the US Congress, and to improve and maintain Taiwan-US relations. Let us march for Taiwan this spring.
Mike Kuo is president of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS