If you were a US president and wanted to give Taiwan a diplomatic smackdown, what would you do?
You can't cut ties because officially they don't exist. Public rebukes of a democratic leader don't play well when your supposed God-given mission is spreading the Gospel of Freedom worldwide. Halting arms sales would expose you to vicious attacks from the neocon and commie-hating right -- not to mention stirring up a hornet's nest of irate defense contractors who would lose lucrative contracts. And besides, the pan-blue camp's doing a good enough job stopping such deals anyway.
There's not much a US president can do, frankly. You're left with petty diplomatic knuckle-rapping -- but that seems to sting Taiwan plenty.
I'm referring, of course, to Uncle Sam's eleventh-hour decision last week that President Chen Shui-bian (
As media reports pointed out, it's the chilliest treatment a Taiwanese president has received from the US since Lee Teng-hui (
God only knows what get-up Chen would have chosen to express his displeasure. Perhaps a fruit hat -- and nothing else. At any rate, a miffed Chen decided to pick up his toys and find other kids to play with -- in the United Arab Emirates.
So what's the big deal about Chen's trips to the US, anyway? As The Associated Press patiently explained for the umpteenth time: "China considers self-governed Taiwan as part of its territory and frowns on any visits by its leaders that might imply Taiwanese sovereignty."
Now, I understand the need to write in language that a six-year-old could understand -- after all, that's the reading level of most Americans (the AP's home audience), if recent education statistics are to be believed. But wouldn't it be nice sometimes to read something more accurate? Something along the lines, of, oh, I don't know: "China, which has a delusional view of history and is in deep collective denial, considers Taiwan part of its territory -- although a claim over Moldova would be about as legitimate. It frowns on anything Taiwan does that might imply reality."
Reuters copy should get a similar makeover. Their explanation, "China ... views any country that plays host to Chen as encouraging his vision of a separate Taiwanese identity," should read as follows: "China views any country that plays host to Chen as encouraging a clear view of Taiwan's status, unmuddied by Beijing's `greater China' propaganda."
And does Reuters really have to rub it in about our diplomatic allies? "Only 26 states -- mostly small, poor countries -- recognize Taipei instead of Beijing." They might as well write, "Only 26 states -- mostly tin-can, pissant places that by all rights shouldn't even be called countries, the bottom of the barrel, the riff-raff of the international community -- recognize Taipei instead of Beijing."
What about the feelings of the 11,810 people of Tuvalu? Or does Reuters not care about them?
And let's not let die scribblers at Deutsche Presse-Agentur get away unedited either. They wrote: "More than 160 countries recognize China and see Taiwan as China's breakaway province."
I don't think you'd find many US officials who'd call Taiwan a "breakaway province" -- unless China's lobbying efforts in Washington are progressing better than I realize. But never mind. How about: "More than 160 countries do not dispute China's claim over Taiwan due to their shocking historical ignorance, Chiang Kai-shek's (
So much for the wirespeak on why Chen's trips to the US get China's knickers in a twist. But why did the US decide to cave in this time? The media was full of speculation -- the US needs China's help with Iran, it's too soon after Chinese President Hu Jintao's (胡錦濤) trip to Washington, it's payback for Chen's scrapping of the National Unification Council, US President George W. Bush personally thinks Chen is a big doofus. Which is it? All, or none, of the above? Who knows.
Anyway, Taipei should relax, because it could have been worse. Washington could have told Chen to transit through Fargo, North Dakota -- or anywhere in Nebraska. Or to judge by the opinions of a certain letter-writer in Taichung, there's an even worse punishment: Salt Lake City, Utah -- where the US could have made Chen spend a night each way hosted by Mormons. Of course, then you run the distinct danger that the president might be converted en route to Paraguay, with God only knows what diplomatic consequences.
Besides, Taiwan has ample opportunity to exact revenge. The next time the US sends high-ranking pseudo-diplomats to Taipei, the Taiwanese government should make them transit through Puli (
The central government has leapt into action, too. Never mind that this year's recently completed Han Kuang military exercises were halted when the simulated Chinese army made it to Taipei by rolling almost unopposed down the Yangjin Highway. No, there are more pressing priorities: such as making Japanese tourists happier -- which is why the government has declared a "War on Dog Droppings."
Fine, but here's my advice: Don't clean up Puli too much, because it may soon be hosting US officials.
Heard or read something particularly objectionable about Taiwan? Johnny wants to know: dearjohnny@taipeitimes.com is the place to reach me, with "Dear Johnny" in the subject line.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS