Fri, Mar 10, 2000 page12

• Editorial: US policy gets 'real' again

  • • 
    • 
    • 

  For the second time in as many weeks US President Bill Clinton has remarked that issues between Taiwan and Beijing must be solved with the consent of the Taiwan people. Actually, in his speech at Johns Hopkins University on Tuesday he used the word "assent" but the difference is minimal. Clinton said that China must "shift from threat to dialogue" in handling cross-strait relations.

  When Clinton first referred to cross-strait settlement needing the consent of Taiwan's people -- just after China issued its white paper in which it threatened armed conflict should Taiwan procrastinate on negotiations for reunification -- it was tempting to dismiss this as a slip of the tongue. After all, almost at the same time Clinton was telling members of Congress that China's bellicosity should be forgiven because it was provoked by Taiwan holding elections -- which hardly seems to be a ringing endorsement of the political values that the US generally champions and which Taiwan has so recently adopted.

  That Clinton should suddenly develop a respect for the wishes of the people of Taiwan seems to signal something new. Previous US policy seems to have limited itself to saying that a solution to problems across the Taiwan Strait must be peaceful and it is up to Taiwan and China to work this out themselves. Respect for the aspirations of the people of Taiwan has been consistently absent, most notoriously in Clinton's "three no's" statement in Shanghai in 1998, where he abrogated any moral responsibility he had by denying the Taiwanese the right of self-determination in his expressed opposition to Taiwan independence. Almost certainly, the White House has no intention of changing its "three no's" policy, so how are we to read its new-found interest in solutions that have the consent/assent of the Taiwanese?

  The clue lies further along in his speech where Clinton appears in a more familiar role, as an apologist and spin doctor for Beijing. Stressing that he had read the white paper carefully, he found, he said, that it contains some positive information. Beijing does not demand that Taipei retract its special state-to-state definition of cross strait relations, and is willing to hold talks "on a flexible agenda in line with the principles of parity."

  So Clinton thinks there are positive things in the white paper while also talking of the assent of the Taiwan people. Two messages are being sent here, one to each side of the Taiwan Strait. To Taiwan, the message is that the bellicosity of the white paper is no reason to demonize Beijing to the extent that talk becomes impossible. Beijing, on the other hand, is supposed to get the message that it is simply going to have to take into consideration how reunification under any formula is going to be sold to the Taiwanese. The US, even under Clinton's vacuous leadership, has made it quite plain that force is not an option it will tolerate. Taiwan cannot be coerced, so it is going to have to be wooed and the sooner China stops its adolescent display of testosterone-driven machismo the better.

  This message seems benign enough, even coming from Clinton. But we have reservations; namely that, given the limits put on Taiwan's negotiating position by Clinton's "three no's," any attempt to speed up the resumption of talks would be tantamount to bringing forward a conclusion that has already been decided. Clinton's message is that Taiwan must not be coerced into talks on reunification but must be courted. There is, alas, no room for the Taiwanese to have the freedom to simply reject unification. Clinton's concern for the consent of Taiwanese will never go that far.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Palmeiras hopes for club cup win

  • 2

    US to deliver 10 new F-16s, source says

  • 3

    Taiwan to see nine extended holidays in 2026

  • 4

    Taiwan blacklists Huawei and SMIC

  • 5

    Ma Ying-jeou’s forum speech regrettable, MAC says