As Natasha Kassam and Richard McGregor recently observed in The Australian, “The paradox for Xi (Jinping, 習近平)’s China is that despite Beijing’s rising economic and military power, Taiwan in many respects has never been so far out of reach.” There presently is negligible support in Taiwan for unification, and even less for the “one country, two systems” model, particularly following recent events in Hong Kong. The more this trend continues, the more Beijing likely will intensify its efforts to pull Taiwan into its orbit.
Given this reality, Taiwan must ensure it maintains rock-solid relationships with its closest partners, foremost the United States. Washington and Taipei consistently have maintained strong bipartisan support for close US-Taiwan ties. This feature of the relationship must not be taken for granted.
Elsewhere in the world, partisanship is undermining relationships of long standing. In the case of Israel, Prime Minister Netanyahu allowed a perception to emerge that he supported Republican candidate Mitt Romney in his 2012 bid to unseat President Obama. Netanyahu later bypassed the Obama administration to secure an invitation to address a joint session of Congress. These actions resulted in a degradation of Israel’s influence in the Obama White House. Trump vowed to reverse that following his re-election, arguing that he and other Republicans were Israel’s only true friends in the United States. Not surprisingly, a 2018 Pew survey showed a widening partisan split in support for Israel, with 79 percent of Republicans sympathizing with Israel in its dispute with Palestinians, versus 27 percent of Democrats. Cumulatively, these and other factors now pose a challenge to the bipartisanship that has been a cornerstone of US-Israel relations since Israel’s founding in 1948.
Similarly, there are fresh questions about whether the special relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia will endure beyond the Trump administration. Leading Democratic presidential nominees have taken turns bashing Saudi Arabia, with Bernie Sanders calling the kingdom a “brutal dictatorship,” Joe Biden calling them a “pariah” that did not deserve to be able to continue purchasing US weapons, and others calling for a wholesale re-evaluation of the relationship. While much of this ire is the result of recent Saudi actions, including the dismemberment of a US-based journalist at the hands of Saudi intelligence services as well as war atrocities in Yemen, some of it also is owed to the Saudis’ seemingly partisan embrace of Republicans in recent years.
These examples should provide cautionary lessons for Taipei. Like Taiwan, Israel and Saudi Arabia have been longtime friends of the United States. They both have been critical American partners in a key region of the world. They both confront acute threats. And they both now face uncertainty about the future nature of their relationships with their most important security partner.
Taiwan cannot afford to travel down a similar path. That is why officials and opinion leaders in Taipei should be cautious about appearing to embrace arguments that Republicans support Taiwan and Democrats do not. At the same time, American leaders must not show sympathy for arguments emanating from Taipei that the DPP supports strong relations with the United States, but the KMT does not. To do otherwise would be to place the future of the US-Taiwan relationship at risk.
During the Trump and Tsai (Ing-wen, 蔡英文) administrations, many important steps have been taken in the spirit of strengthening US-Taiwan relations. In response to intensifying pressure from Beijing, the United States has sent strong signals of reassurance to Taiwan. US officials consistently have described Taiwan as a critical partner in America’s Indo-Pacific strategy. There has been robust support for a joint cooperative agenda on an expanding set of issues. There has been tight diplomatic coordination on matters pertaining to Taiwan’s international space. There have been substantial arms sales to Taiwan. There also has been clear American military signaling in defense of Taiwan.
These actions build upon efforts from previous administrations. For example, President Obama notified Congress of US$14 billion in arms sales to Taiwan. He was consistent, direct, proactive, and principled on Taiwan matters in his interactions with Chinese leaders, including by emphasizing that Beijing must respect Taiwan’s democratic system and its 23 million people, whose views will be determinative of Taiwan’s relationship with the mainland. His administration sent the USAID head to Taiwan in 2011, and the EPA Administrator in 2014, marking the first Cabinet-level visit to Taiwan since the Clinton administration. The Global Cooperation and Training Framework and the International Environmental Partnership were launched, and Taiwan was admitted into the Visa Waiver Program. There were regular meetings of trade officials to advance economic relations. Both sides also broke new ground in cooperating on global challenges, from the joint response to the Ebola outbreak to Taiwan’s entry into the counter-ISIL coalition, as well as clean energy and public health projects with third countries.
My point is not to argue which US political party is a better friend to Taiwan. Rather, it is to highlight that presidents from both political parties in both capitals have identified it as in their interests to support close US-Taiwan ties. That is how it has been and how it must continue to be, both in Washington and Taipei.
Ryan Hass is Fellow and Michael H. Armacost Chair in Foreign Policy Studies at the Brookings Institution, where he holds a joint appointment to the John L. Thornton China Center and the Center for East Asia Policy Studies.
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The National Development Council (NDC) on Wednesday last week launched a six-month “digital nomad visitor visa” program, the Central News Agency (CNA) reported on Monday. The new visa is for foreign nationals from Taiwan’s list of visa-exempt countries who meet financial eligibility criteria and provide proof of work contracts, but it is not clear how it differs from other visitor visas for nationals of those countries, CNA wrote. The NDC last year said that it hoped to attract 100,000 “digital nomads,” according to the report. Interest in working remotely from abroad has significantly increased in recent years following improvements in