The US did not recognize Taiwan as being a part of the People's Republic of China, did not endorse the use of force to make it so, and did not adopt "one-China" as an American objective.
Intellectual laziness has led US officials to speak of an American "one-China" policy. Because the US recognizes only one legal government of China, they mistakenly adopt Beijing's jargon. But the issue is not who is the legal government of China, but who is the legal government of Taiwan. Beijing, in this white paper and elsewhere, is using American adherence to the "one-China policy" as justification for coercing Taiwan to the negotiating table, or worse. Before another American official again speaks of a "one-China" principle or policy, he should reconsider whether he really wants to be a party to this coercion.
"One-China" perhaps has had some utility over the years in helping China, Taiwan, and the US move forward on issues of common concern and interest. But it is useful only as long as it remains hollow. Progress was achieved from Nixon to Clinton, and through Koo and Wang, precisely because no side imposed a definition of "one-China" on the other.
The minute one side imposes meaning on the "one-China" framework, it falls apart -- hindering rather than helping cross-strait relations. For this reason alone, the US should reject China's latest white paper.
But even more, Washington must not let this power play go unanswered. President Clinton must make up for his Shanghai failure by publicly restating the "six assurances" US President Ronald Reagan offered Taiwan in the wake of the 1982 Arms Communique. The US Senate should vote on the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act to demonstrate to Beijing that the US never agreed to compromise Taiwan's security in the course of diplomatic relations with China.
And finally, no US official should use the term "one-China" to describe American policy. We recognize Beijing as China's government. We acknowledge Beijing's goal of peaceful unification. We insist on peace. Leave the name calling to Beijing.
Stephen Yates is a senior policy analyst at the Asian Studies Center at the Heritage Foundation.
RSS