The “Trump doctrine” is fairly straightforward: If a deal, regardless of its historical importance or role in securing the welfare of the people or defense of the state, is deemed bad, then it should be renegotiated or, if that seems hard, discarded. Also, deals involving those who have wronged US President Donald Trump should be reviewed first.
Trump has so far only applied his doctrine to the highest level of US obligations, such as NATO and the North American Free Trade Agreement, or the most obvious deals he perceives as unfair, like Chinese trade practices.
Unsurprisingly, the doctrine, having been applied so broadly and haphazardly, has failed to do much to support long-term US interests: Manufacturers and small farming operations are moving out or closing down, allies are questioning the US’ stability and the veracity of its intentions, and opportunities to secure US priorities are being missed.
One such opportunity is the chance to condemn Chinese efforts to verbally annex Taiwan. Through a combination of dollar diplomacy and overt political manipulation, China has succeeded in reducing the nation’s international standing and economic outlook.
Trump could stifle China’s efforts and, correspondingly, assist a growing democracy in a region of immense significance.
In response to Taiwanese electing President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), a staunch advocate of the nation’s democracy, China pushed four countries to end their allyships with Taiwan. China lured these countries with promises of increased investment and closer political ties. Now just 19 members of the UN recognize Taiwan.
On the economic side, China threatened to limit entry into its lucrative market to any airline that lists Taiwan as a country. Airlines quickly relented. Case in point, British Airways relisted their flights to the nation as Taipei, Taiwan — China.
The latest example of Chinese “namefare” resulted in Taiwan losing the right to host next year’s East Asian Youth Games.
Trump ought to apply his doctrine to China denying Taiwan of this meaningful opportunity. Chinese action meets the only tests imposed by the doctrine: one, it is a bad deal; and two, China — at least in Trump’s opinion — has previously wronged him.
On the first test: What makes China’s pressure on the East Asian Olympic Committee (EAOC) — the body responsible for revoking Taiwan as the host of the Games — a bad deal?
According to the Olympic creed: “The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win, but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph, but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered, but to have fought well.”
In removing the Games from Taiwan, the EAOC is directly contradicting the Olympic creed. The force imposed by Chinese officials on the committee resulted in it failing to fight well. Committee officials also evidenced no sort of struggle and ultimately denied young athletes around the region the chance to take part in an event in a historic setting.
What is more, according to the mayor of Taichung, which was to host the Games, the EAOC did not adhere to the contract it signed with the municipality. He alleged that the EAOC did not inform the city of any grounds for breaking the contract, nor did it allow for any sort of dispute resolution process prior to reneging on the deal. Clearly, this case passes the first test.
Regarding the second test: This is clearly a chance for Trump to stand up to Chinese influence, an opportunity he rarely misses. By calling out China for its continued attempts to verbally annex Taiwan, Trump can show supporters and opponents alike that he is capable of more than threatening tariffs.
He could also use this opportunity to paint himself in a more favorable light as an advocate of democracy. Republicans and Democrats have historically been fairly receptive to US efforts to shore up Taiwan’s burgeoning civic institutions.
There is also some precedent for Trump applying his doctrine to Taiwan. When then-president elect Trump took a telephone call with Tsai, he showed his willingness to frustrate China’s preference for US-Taiwan relations.
It is time for Trump to take his advocacy for Taiwan offline and into the political and economic realm.
Trump might not be able to restore the Games to Taiwan, but by protesting a bad deal, he can stem China’s increasing interference in Taiwanese affairs.
Kevin Frazier is a masters of public policy candidate at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government who visited Taiwan through the Mosaic Taiwan 2018 fellowship program.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under