Last month, Taiwan’s top Representative to the US Jason Yuan (袁健生) said during a question-and-answer session in the legislature that he thought it unlikely US President Barack Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) would issue a fourth joint communique or even a joint statement during Hu’s visit to the US. Facts have now showed that either US officials do not trust Yuan, or that his judgment is questionable at best.
Not only did the two issue a joint statement, the statement dealt with issues relating to China’s “core interests,” a term that was used last year and is likely to have a big impact on Taiwan.
The US has long held that its Taiwan Strait policy is based on the three US-Sino communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), but this situation is gradually changing as President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) continues to push his policy of goodwill toward China.
When Obama visited China in 2009, the two sides signed a joint statement which stated that territorial integrity was a Chinese core interest. That was seen as a heavy blow to the cross-strait “status quo,” but the Ma administration did not protest. This tacit acceptance of the phrase “core interests” and the repeated affirmation of its use is gradually resulting in the formalization of the phrase. Hu then dealt another blow in a speech at the National Committee on US-China Relations when he said that Taiwan, Tibet and China’s territorial integrity were China’s core interests, thus clarifying what the phrase really means.
The joint statement said the US would adhere to its “one China” policy, but failed to mention the TRA, which was only touched on verbally by Obama.
As the phrase “core interests” is being gradually formalized, one wonders whether leaving the TRA out of written statements will also become quietly formalized. This is something that requires further observation. A while back, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said in light of the readjustment of cross-strait relations, the US would re-evaluate its arms sales policy to Taiwan.
These are two major changes, but the US still has not reiterated former president Ronald Reagan’s six points from 1982. This implies that small changes are gradually being made to the US’ Taiwan policy as a result of the Ma administration’s pro-China stance. In the short term, these changes may not seem very big and the US will continue to interpret the meaning of “one China” the way it sees fit.
However, the policy changes set in motion by the Ma administration’s pro-China policies are gradually and quietly being accepted by the US, China and Taiwan. The US-Sino communique issued on Aug. 17, 1982, had a major impact on the cross-strait “status quo” and it was only after strong protests from Taiwan that Reagan issued his six guarantees.
Faced with these very real dangers, the Ma administration must demand that the US reiterates the six points. The cross-strait “status quo” is changing constantly. If the Ministry of Foreign Affairs continues to view this situation as a diplomatic truce, I am afraid that by the time things start to go wrong, China will already have the situation fully under control.
Lee Tuo-tzu is deputy chief of staff for Legislator Chen Ming-wen.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS