The US-China Economic and Security Review Commission on Thursday published its Annual Report to Congress, which should make for interesting reading not only in Washington, but also in Taipei — in the Presidential Office, the ministries of foreign affairs and national defense, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and elsewhere — especially chapters 5 and 6, which cover Taiwan and Hong Kong.
The commission’s members are not wearing the West’s decades-old blinders — that engagement with China could lead to meaningful reform — but see that Beijing has become a clear threat to democracy not just in Asia, but around the world.
Commission vice chair Robin Cleveland wrote in the report’s introduction that the aspirations of Taiwan and Hong Kong require the US to reconsider “the commitments we made under the one country, two systems model.”
The five recommendations that the report makes for US policy toward Taiwan urge the US Congress to have the US secretary of state report on actions to counter China’s isolation of Taiwan internationally, pass legislation to enhance Taiwan-US security cooperation and raise the threshold for congressional notification on defense sales to Taiwan to the highest level; direct the Pentagon to prepare a 15-year action plan to deter any attempt by Beijing to take Taiwan by force; and instruct the US director of national intelligence to study the impact of an event in the Taiwan Strait on the supply of high-tech products to the US.
The five recommendations on Hong Kong are equally far-reaching, the most important of which is the call for legislation to suspend the territory’s special economic status if Beijing resorts to armed intervention by the People’s Liberation Army or People’s Armed Police.
While the 12-member commission’s recommendations are non-binding, they do influence US lawmakers and policymakers — and should be a wake-up call to those in similar positions in other nations.
This year’s report was based on eight public hearings and the testimony of 77 witnesses, who ranged from US government officials to businesspeople to think tank members and other researchers. They must have made it clear to the commission that, as its chairwoman Carolyn Bartholomew told a news conference in Washington on Thursday: “If there were flickers of opening up in China, they have been firmly extinguished.”
Her statement, as with the report’s findings and conclusions, is a strong rebuttal to the KMT’s delusions that the cross-strait openings created during former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) terms in office could spur change in China.
It is also a rebuttal to those — whether in Taiwan, the US or elsewhere — who lay blame for the breakdown in cross-strait communications and the increase in cross-strait tensions solely at the feet of President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), rather than where it truly belongs, with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) leadership.
It is not Tsai and the DPP’s refusal to recognize the KMT’s fictitious “1992 consensus” that caused the freeze, but the delusion of Xi and his cohort that they understand the needs and wants of their “Taiwanese compatriots.”
The same blinkered approach that the CCP leadership has long had toward Taiwan has been in clear evidence in Hong Kong over the past few years.
Just as Beijing can no longer dismiss opposition to its demands to annex Taiwan as the fault of the DPP or pro-independence supporters — who are not one and the same — the past five months show that it cannot pretend that calls for greater democracy in Hong Kong are just the work of students and malcontents.
Beijing and the CCP have no one to blame but themselves.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
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
RSS