Fri, Jun 01, 2001 page3

• Scholar believes Bush's Taiwan pledge went too far

  • By Charles Snyder / STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  A leading US conservative scholar who normally supports America's close ties to Taiwan says that President Bush went too far when he committed America to come to Taiwan's aid against a Chinese attack, arguing that Taiwan is not a vital US security interest deserving of such a policy.

  Ted Galen Carpenter, vice president for defense and foreign policy studies for the libertarian Cato Institute, in a policy paper released Wednesday, was referring to Bush's comment on a television talk show last month that his administration would do "whatever it took" to defend Taiwan in case of a mainland attack.

  While Bush almost immediately began to backtrack from that impromptu remark, the scholar says that Beijing and others still consider it to be the US administration's policy -- and a major divergence from the long-term Washington policy of ambiguity in its defense commitments to Taiwan.

  "Washington should couple its policy of arms sales to Taiwan with a firm statement that the United States will not become involved in any armed struggle between Taiwan and the PRC," Carpenter wrote.

  "The Taiwanese could then make their own decision about whether to opt for independence, seek to preserve the ambiguous status quo, or attempt to negotiate the best terms possible for eventual reunification with China.

  "They would pursue whatever course they chose at their own risk, not America's," he said.

  Carpenter's remarks are symptomatic of the intensified debate in Washington that has followed Bush's remarks, the robust arms sales package approved at about the same time, and the administration's approval of President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) state-like three-day visit to New York City, where he met nearly two dozen Congressman, Mayor Rudolf Giuliani, US business leaders, the Taiwanese-American community, and think tank scholars.

  Bush's Taiwan defense commitment "creates an extremely dangerous situation for the United States," Carpenter said.

  "A security commitment creates the prospect of either a humiliating US retreat during a crisis or a catastrophic war with a nuclear-armed China," he said.

  Carpenter contrasts a potential Bush deterrence policy toward China with Washington's deterrence policy toward the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Then, he argues, the US had a real security interest in the fate of Western Europe and Northeast Asia. That interest, he says is now lacking when it comes to Taiwan.

  China realizes that, too, he says. "To Beijing, Taiwan is not merely a political and economic prize; the status of the island is caught up in issues of national pride and prestige. Taiwan is a reminder of China's long period of humiliation at the hands of outside powers.

  When such potent emotions are engaged, even normally dispassionate political leaders do not always act prudently or even rationally," Carpenter said.

  "Taiwan is a limited, or peripheral,' not a vital, American interest," he said. "Advocates of a security commitment to Taiwan typically fail to make that distinction."

  A Sino-US skirmish over Taiwan "might spiral out of control," he said.

  "Such a level of risk should never be incurred except in defense of a vital American security interest. Preserving Taiwan's de facto independence does not meet that test."
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Hsieh keeps Wimbledon title hopes alive

  • 2

    Referendum, 26 recall votes could cost NT$1.62 billion

  • 3

    Lai vows continued Haiti support

  • 4

    Michelin expands coverage to New Taipei City, Hsinchu

  • 5

    Two dead after dinghy capsizes during New Taipei City rescue