What is left of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) still does not want to see Taiwan succeed. It has tried to put a damper on the telephone call from President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) to US president-elect Donald Trump, warning Tsai not to allow herself to become a pawn in Washington’s chess game, and to learn the lessons of the limitations of the nation’s expectations from the era of its dealings with former US president Ronald Reagan.
However, the KMT’s note of caution does not ring true and its warnings fail to get to the root of the problem.
The truth is that Taiwan has always played the US, too. When Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) was in power, he ensured Taiwan’s security by using the US to resist China, and pro-localization governments have used the US to prevent the forced annexation of Taiwan by China.
It might be more accurate to say that Taiwan and the US are actually playing the same game of chess, on the same side. They both stand to gain from winning.
That nations play other nations off each other is a given in international relations. During the Cold War, the US blocked the expansion of communist forces by forming alliances with Asia-Pacific nations — including the anti-communist Chiang regime in Taiwan.
That is why then-Chinese leader Mao Zedong (毛澤東) called Chiang a “lackey of US imperialism.”
However, Mao, as well as former Chinese leaders Zhou Enlai (周恩來) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), all chose to ally with the US and Japan against Russia by forming semi-alliances. Did that make them “lackeys of US imperialism” too?
Since Chiang and his gang are gone, the Chinese have now shifted their attention to attacking pro-independence advocates as “lackeys of US imperialism.” This, at the same time as many are quietly sending vast amounts of money, as well as their families to the US. Are those Chinese not hiding in the homes of US imperialism more like lackeys?
Although the KMT has gotten what it deserves, it is merely accusing former US presidents Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter of having sold out Taiwan. However, in reality, when the US formally withdrew its recognition of the Republic of China (ROC) government, it was the Chiang regime that sold out Taiwan by insisting on its claims to represent the whole of China. The KMT’s absurd hubris led to the US’ “one China” policy which has been harmful to Taiwan’s interests.
As for Reagan, he was unable to restore diplomatic relations between Taiwan and the US during his time in office simply because the time was not right, as the US and China had just established diplomatic ties in 1979, a mere two years before he took office in 1981.
Reagan’s secretary of state, Alexander Haig, was a deputy of former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger, the man who signed the 1972 Shanghai Communique with Beijing to recognize — but not endorse — the “one China” policy.
It should also be pointed out that there were valid reasons for Washington’s “allying with China against Russia” and Deng’s “allying with the US and Japan against Russia.”
Trump no longer needs to ally with China against Russia, and he might even do the opposite. Today, Chinese hegemony has exposed its ambition and brutality, despite international norms. This is more irritating to Washington.
More than half a century has passed since the signing of the communique, and it is difficult for Kissinger’s followers to find legitimate reasons to defend his “pro-China” policy.
James Wang is a senior journalist.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has
RSS