American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Chairman James Moriarty met with President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and Legislative Speaker You Si-kun (游錫堃) on Thursday last week.
When You raised the question of re-establishing diplomatic relations between Taiwan and the US, Moriarty said that “the two countries” share common values and interests, and that “the two countries” have open and transparent market mechanisms.
Moriarty’s reference to Taiwan and the US as “two countries” was an indirect response to You’s question and an extension of his own remarks at the start of his meeting with Tsai, when he said: “I look forward to discussing the next chapter of US-Taiwan cooperation with President Tsai.”
This is a big change of direction by Moriarty.
When Moriarty arrived on Dec. 1, 2003, as the envoy of then-US president George W. Bush, he urged then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) to cancel a referendum regarding Taiwan’s relations with China to avoid angering Beijing.
When he came to Taiwan again in December 2017, his purpose, according to former US deputy national security adviser Stephen Yates, was to keep an eye on proposed amendments to the Referendum Act (公投法) and stop them from being enacted.
Given this background, it is remarkable that he is now speaking openly about Taiwan and the US being two countries, with no concern about angering China.
On Feb. 13, You told AIT Director Brent Christensen that he hoped Taiwan and the US could establish diplomatic relations, but Christensen did not dare to reply.
The next day, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) accused You of using the COVID-19 outbreak as a cover for promoting Taiwanese independence.
You responded with a Facebook post thanking TAO spokesman Ma Xiaoguang (馬曉光) for raising his international profile, so that more attention would be paid to his efforts to promote diplomatic relations between Taiwan and the US.
Four days later, You received a letter from an 88-year-old former Nationalist Army soldier that threatened You and his family; the same writer threatened You at the beginning of this month, warning him not to promote Taiwan-US diplomatic ties.
You has scored this step forward in parliamentary diplomacy after being legislative speaker for just over a month.
It is ridiculous that his achievement should be obscured by a tide of silly reports about something he said about police patrol boxes.
[Editor’s note: You on Thursday last week said that the police patrol box next to his residence was empty, implying that officers had not been patrolling the neighborhood or checking the box.]
Sim Kiantek is a former associate professor of business administration at National Chung Hsing University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS