Mon, Jun 28, 2010 page3

• ANALYSIS : Taipei not ready for talks with Beijing

  • By Ko Shu-ling / STAFF REPORTER
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  With or without a proposal by China to redeploy missiles targeting Taiwan, Taipei is not ready to engage in political negotiations with Beijing, analysts said.

  During congressional testimony by US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates on June 16, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein said China had offered to reposition its military forces opposite Taiwan to ease cross-strait tensions.

  “In my meeting with some of the leadership, it was mentioned that China had offered to redeploy back,” she was quoted as saying. “Now I understand the word ‘redeploy’ isn’t ‘remove.’”

  Feinstein called the arms deals “a substantial irritant” in relations between Washington and Beijing, and said she expected they would remain so.

  Gates cited the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) as justification for the sales.

  On June 17, US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg denied that China had offered to redeploy its forces facing Taiwan if Washington would stop selling arms to Taipei.

  Feinstein’s aide also said on June 18 that she was referring to an offer that was made in the past and was no longer on the table.

  Nevertheless, as China is likely to make such an offer again, the question remains: How should Taiwan respond?

  Liu Bih-rong (劉必榮), a professor of political science at Soochow University, said Taiwan could be pressured into political negotiations if China offered to redeploy its missiles.

  Liu, who specializes in negotiations theory, said Taiwan should pick up the gauntlet and seek a dominant role at the negotiation table.

  “Since political negotiations are inevitable, we must be prepared,” he said.

  Political negotiations with Beijing do not necessarily mean that Taiwan would unify with China, he said, adding that political negotiations are an arrangement for political order. The arrangement can constitute various scenarios, including maintaining the “status quo,” he said. Taiwan must set the agenda and pace of negotiations, he said, adding that a slow and cautious approach would be preferable.

  Liu said the administration should form a task force to deal with the matter. Opposition parties, meanwhile, should develop a new discourse in accordance with new developments.

  Paul Lin (林保華), a political commentator, disagreed, saying Taiwan should firmly reject Beijing’s offer if it were to make one.

  Whether the missiles are removed is irrelevant, Lin said, because China has more powerful and advanced offensive weapons with which to launch an attack.

  Even if China destroyed the missiles, Lin said it would be risky to sign a peace treaty with a communist regime, as they are not trustworthy.

  Lin — a researcher specializing in the history of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) — pointed to the armistice agreement signed by North and South Korea, truce agreements between North and South Vietnam and ceasefire treaties signed by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the CCP.

  Lin said President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) call for Beijing to remove missiles put Taiwan in a quandary, because it would be very hard for Taiwan to respond if China made the offer.

  Former deputy National Security Council (NSC) secretary-­general Chen Chung-hsin (陳忠信) said Ma’s demand that Beijing remove its missiles was pointless because the missile launchers are mobile.

  “To ask Beijing to remove the missiles is a non-issue,” he said. “China has short, medium and long-range missiles. Even if it removed the missiles that are deployed along its southeast coastline, China could still launch missiles from central provinces.”

  Analysts agreed that the public should not draw parallels between Chinese military redeployments and US arms sales to Taiwan.

  Beijing might hope Washington would stop selling arms to Taiwan if it offered to redeploy its forces, but the matters are not of equal value, Chen said.

  “Beijing would very much like to see this happen, but if anyone in Taipei harbors such thinking, that person must either be an idiot or have ulterior motives,” he said.

  It was Feinstein’s “wishful thinking” that China’s redeployment of military forces would lead to cross-strait peace, Chen said, because the People’s Liberation Army remains strong and Beijing has yet to change its strategic goal of unifying Taiwan and China.

  Lin said he did not want to speculate as to whether Washington would stop selling arms to Taipei if cross-strait relations continued to improve. Even if China destroyed the missiles, Chen said, the US should continue to honor the TRA and sell arms to Taiwan.

  Liu said he did not think Washington would stop selling arms to Taiwan because the sales were meant to protect the US’ interests — not Taiwan’s. Liu praised Ma for making it clear that Taiwan would “never” ask the US to fight for Taiwan, saying the US would come to Taiwan’s aid without a request by Taiwan if doing so was in the US’ interest.

  While the Ma administration has repeatedly called on Washington to sell weapons to Taiwan, analysts were divided over whether the administration was serious about buying arms from the US.

  Lin described the administration’s apparent determination as a political gambit aimed at deceiving the Taiwanese. He said if the administration did not repeat the calls, it would only make clear its capitulation policy.

  Chen said he was not certain about the administration’s intent, but that it was well known that former NSC secretary-general Su Chi (蘇起) was an adamant critic of arms procurement packages when he was a KMT legislator during the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) terms in office.

  For Beijing, Chen said the Ma administration’s seemingly cavalier attitude toward arms procurements put China at ease, making it possible for Beijing to apply pressure on the US rather than on Taiwan. Washington, however, has yet to bow to Beijing’s pressure, he said.

  Liu said arms procurements were a “question without an answer” that should be put aside. He said China would continue to protest, while the US would continue to sell and Taiwan would continue to buy.

  Likening China’s protests to “sneezing,” which he said was “no big deal,” Liu said they were merely “ceremonial” and “routine.” It would be “strange” if China had not protested, he said.

  Liu also defended the KMT’s change of heart on arms procurement after it returned to power, saying the situations were different.

  The KMT opposed arms procurement when it was in opposition because it believed the DPP should have focused more on improving cross-strait relations than spending money on expensive weapons, he said. Now the KMT wants to buy arms to placate Taiwanese who worry that cross-strait detente is proceeding too hastily, he said.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    TSMC to start building four new plants

  • 2

    Taiwan attack would unleash China: Rudd

  • 3

    US House passes US$500m Taiwan aid

  • 4

    Moya withdraws from All-Star Game after wife’s death

  • 5

    US House passes ‘Honest Maps’ bill