20030902

China's influence need not be bad

KEEPING UP: While Beijing looks to boost its standing in the world, it could be building a relationship with the US that is too precious to jeopardize by invading Taiwan

By Stephanie Wen

STAFF REPORTER

While few expected the six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear crisis in Beijing last week to produce a breakthrough, the nuclear issue is nevertheless raising concerns that China is gaining influence in the region, possibly at the expense of Taiwan.

"China's influence over North Korea, though weakening by the day, is nevertheless undeniably significant," Holmes Liao, adviser to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said.

Liao said China was trying to elevate its international status by cutting oil supplies to North Korea and bringing together the two Koreas, Russia, Japan and the US for talks on resolving the nuclear dispute on the Korean Peninsula.

This has made the US-China-Taiwan relationship more unpredictable, he said.

But reducing the danger posed by North Korea is not just a matter of maintaining peace in East Asia but also of eliminating the risks to the US' domestic security.

"It is very likely that nuclear weapons made in North Korea will end up in New York City," said Banning Garrett, director of Asia programs at the Atlantic Council.

During his presentation at an international conference hosted by Taiwan's Institute of Policy Research last week in Taipei, Garrett said that after Sept. 11, US national security strategy and foreign policy has become focused on fighting terrorism and preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction rather than maintaining peace and stability.

China, in hosting the six-nation talks on Pyongyang's nuclear weapons program, appears to be addressing Washington's top priority.

"Some would view that such an increase of the PRC's significance would change the US-PRC relationship and thereby change how the US would handle the PRC-Taiwan relationship," Garrett said. "But the two are not linked."

Garrett said that China has its own interests in taking an active role in solving the North Korean nuclear crisis.

"One is its own motivation to continue its relations with US, the other is its growing awareness of its reliance on the global system. As the PRC becomes stronger, it is benefiting from the system and thus it has more at stake to lose should the system not be preserved," Garrett said.

"I don't think the PRC would expect any, or [US President George W.] Bush would give any, concession to the PRC over the cross-strait issue because of its ability to take an active role in the North Korean issue," Garrett said.

Yet Garrett's paper also said that "the overriding criteria for the United States in judging utility and value of other nations to United States' foreign policy and national security seems to have been capabilities a particular nation was willing to contribute to realizing American's objectives."

In response to concerns that improving US-China ties can only jeopardize Taiwan's security, Garrett said Beijing was increasingly finding its relationship with Washington too important to endanger.

"The strengthening of Sino-US relations, rather than increasing cross-strait tension or changes to the US' strategy towards Taiwan, enhances Taiwan's security as the PRC is aware that any crisis [with regard to] Taiwan would undermine its relationship with the US. Both the US and the PRC have a mutual understanding of cross-strait stability," he said.

For China, "cross strait stability" encompasses the idea that Taiwan should continue to exist under its current identity, albeit awkwardly, without recognition of it being a nation in its own right, although this may be unacceptable to pro-independence forces in Taiwan.

"What Taiwan has is a politically abstract problem," Garret said.

"Unlike the Israeli-Palestinian situation -- where every Israeli knows someone who was killed in a Palestinian bombing -- there is no bitter personal hatred from any Taiwanese person towards a Chinese person," he said.

In Garrett's view, China is evolving and therefore Taiwan does not need to hold a hostile political stance towards Beijing.

"No United States president is going to go to war on China if Taiwan declares independence out of the blue. It would not be a wise course to push the envelope on the issue of independence," Garrett said.

"We have a stable situation now. Taiwan is as secure as it has ever been. And I think the United States' administration will remain very concerned about the security of Taiwan and its democracy," he said.

However, Lai I-chung, director of foreign policy studies at Taiwan Thinktank, believes that the US attitude toward the cross-strait issue has already been complicated by the emergence of democracy in Taiwan.

"The whole perspective should be: `Is democracy the solution or part of the problem?'" Lai said.

Using the example of the recent push to hold referendums, Lai said that Taiwan's democratic development and change of internal governance has already complicated the US' attitude toward Taiwan and the cross-strait issue.

`Taiwanese'passports make debut

ALL IN A NAME: A Taipei City resident became the first to receive the new passport that has `Taiwan' written on the cover to help avoid travel chaos

By Huang Tai-lin

STAFF REPORTER

"I think I'd like to visit China first."－Kuo Yi-ming, recipient of the first passport with `Taiwan' in Roman script on the cover

"I think I'd like to visit China first," he said when asked where he would like to go with his new passport.

Unfortunately for Kuo, his new passport will be of little use to him on this trip as Taiwanese visiting China need a "Taiwan compatriot" travel document.

Yang Sheng-chung, director of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' Bureau of Consular Affairs, said that old passports will remain valid until their expiry dates. Old versions of the passport had only the nation's official name, Republic of China, on the cover.

The government's move to add the word "Taiwan" to the cover has upset China, which views it as an affront to the "one China" principle.

Chien defended the change as being apolitical. He said that Taiwanese traveling abroad were often confused with citizens of China and that now it would be clear where they were from.

The foreign minister also said that many countries had expressed a willingness to cooperate with Taiwan over the new passports after a publicity campaign through embassies, consulates and representative offices.

"We have not heard of any dissenting opinions concerning this new version of the passport so far; because after all, it is a pure travel document for ROC nationals," Chien said.

Presidential Office Secretary-General Chiou I-jen, DPP legislators Mark Chen and Hsiao Bi-khim all carried the new version of the passport when they left for Tokyo yesterday to attend a bilateral economic cooperation conference.

Meanwhile, members of the Alliance to Campaign for Rectifying the Name of Taiwan, in an attempt to further their cause of changing the nation's name to Taiwan, yesterday handed out passport jackets with "Republic of Taiwan" printed on them to travelers at CKS International Airport.

A great majority of Taiwan's citizens want their country to join the UN as an independent, sovereign nation. Yet the pan-blue opposition parties, and even the DPP government, continue to cling to the obsolete Republic of China Constitution due to short-sighted domestic politics. The ROC was expelled from the UN in 1971 and lost US diplomatic recognition in 1979, because it falsely claimed sovereignty over all China.

No major country recognizes Taiwan as a sovereign state today. The name Republic of China implies Taiwan is part of a divided China or even an intent to eventually integrate with the People's Republic of China.

There are several advantages in adopting Taiwan as the formal name of the nation through enactment of a new constitution. First, this action will put an end to China's civil war between the Chinese Communist Party and the KMT. It will deprive the CCP of an excuse to annex Taiwan in order to settle the score with its ancient enemy.

The native Taiwanese and even the offspring of the Chinese refugees who escaped to Taiwan in 1949 had nothing to do with the war between the CCP and KMT.

Second, by rectifying the nation's name, the government can proclaim to the whole world that the 23 million Taiwanese have exercised their inherent right of self determination, which is guaranteed under the UN Charter, and have formally established a free and independent nation through direct election of its president and legislature and adoption of a new Taiwanese constitution.

Third, name rectification will delineate Taiwan's separate identity and remove an obstacle to Taiwan's efforts to join the community of nations as a new and equal partner.

Fourth, calling Taiwan by its right name will de-Sinicize Taiwan's culture, and help the residents to identify with, and pledge allegiance to, the Taiwanese nation.

Finally, name rectification is critical if Taiwan wishes to retain its sovereignty and democracy. The PRC is steadily building up its capacity to coerce Taiwan into submission through a multi-pronged blitzkrieg and concerted political warfare, degradation and hollowing out of Taiwan's economy, and psychological intimidation with the help of pro-unification media and pro-PRC elements of the political opposition. The military balance is shifting steadily in China's favor.

The Taiwanese must face this reality and decide what kind of future they want for themselves and their descendants: freedom and democracy or servitude under the CCP regime.

To keep their hard-won freedom, the Taiwanese must clearly show their determination, in words and deeds, that they will do whatever it takes to fight for Taiwan's sovereignty and democracy. This is the only way to ensure international support by fellow democracies such as the US and Japan.

Since the Sept. 11 attacks on the US, international politics has become fluid and unpredictable.

Taiwan must unequivocally and promptly consolidate its independent identity and demonstrate the resolve to defend Taiwan's freedom. This is the first prerequisite for friendly allies to come to Taiwan's aid in a crisis.

As our freedom-loving compatriots of The Alliance to Campaign for Rectifying the Name of Taiwan march in the streets of Taipei on Friday, the Taiwanese Americans here in the US applaud and support them. We join them in our hearts and minds.

As the next presidential election draws near, the cross-strait relationship has become a central issue for both the ruling and opposition parties. President Chen Shui-bian first outlined a three-phase scenario to realize direct links by the end of next year. The strategy is aimed at convincing voters that China will make room for reconciliation once he is re-elected and allow for progress on direct air links.

To counter criticism of its ambiguous position on cross-strait relations, the blue camp is reportedly attempting to rationalize its "one China, with each side making its own interpretation" theory as synonymous with Chen's definition of "two countries on each side."

Conventional wisdom holds that foreign policy doesn't matter in domestic elections. Unless there is a war or some threat from abroad, pundits maintain that voters don't care about what's happening overseas. But this argument overlooks the key role that foreign policy plays in earning politicians brownie points, especially as foreign policy in Taiwan is always intertwined with cross-strait policy.

While the blue camp and some business groups have been pressuring the DPP for an early opening of direct links, the government took the initiative by presenting concrete steps to implement such links.

Although this has been portrayed as an election ploy, the ruling DPP has at least provided voters with a clear vision and timetable for cross-strait economic and trade normalization. However, the extent to which the plan would work lies largely in whether China would accept Chen's plan and resume dialogue.

For the KMT and the PFP, the "one China" myth has become an Achilles' heel since Beijing sabotaged Taiwan's bid for observer status at the World Health Organization. To avoid being labeled China's "comrade," the blue camp has to defuse the impact of the "one China" principle on its own campaign and skillfully de-link itself from Beijing. That explains why both KMT Chairman Lien Chan and PFP Chairman James Soong have been silent on the unification issue.

Beijing's response will determine how Taiwan uses cross-strait policy. Optimists say it is time for China to recognize political reality. That is, Beijing must accept the fact that regardless of whoever wins the presidential election next March, the Taiwanese people are determined to safeguard their sovereignty.

Pessimists, however, argue that if Chen is re-elected, it would constitute a great challenge for Beijing and pose a huge threat to cross-strait peace. A bellicose reaction to Taiwan's new leadership is expected as China tries to downgrade Chen. This approach may run the risk of deteriorating regional stability simply because Beijing cannot accept the results of a democratic election.

The conservative view, however, argues that since China is facing other controversial issues, such as the leadership succession and WTO compliance, Beijing will continue its wait-and-see approach with Chen. Changes in Taiwan's politics, in other words, will determine Beijing's policy toward Taipei. So conservatives consider, for example, whether the DPP's legislative election victory of last December and the rise of the TSU have offered some flexibility for Taipei in cross-strait relations.

It seems that Chen and his DPP have pursued the optimistic approach of dealing with China when it comes to opening direct links. As president, Chen must show his courage to break the ice with Beijing. The strategy deserves full support for it is in line with democratic principles.

For the pan-blue camp, instead of being vague on the cross-strait issue, it is imperative for Lien to speak loud and clear on what he sees as potential cross-strait solutions.

While I appreciate the crux of Joe Schwartz's stance on the relationship between Taiwan and the US (Letters, Aug 27, page 8), I am a tad uncomfortable with Schwartz's insinuation that Taiwan's "unshakeable admiration of all things American" is due to a simple case of gratitude.

One can easily look back on history and note that it was almost entirely due to American interference in the postwar years that millions of Taiwanese came to suffer under the brutality, oppression and despotism that was characteristic of the (foreign) Chinese Nationalist rule of Taiwan in the decades past.

The San Francisco Peace Treaty does not grant the Formosans, the ROC or the PRC rule over Taiwan and the treaty is legitimate because, although the treaty was led by the Americans, it was agreed upon by the rest of the world. There would be no need to "protect" a sovereign Formosa today because the treaty did not create one.

In essence, there was no reason why Formosa could not have proclaimed internationally accepted independence after Japan's relinquishment, had the Americans not sacrificed the Formosans' legal/human right to self-determination by encouraging the KMT to relocate to Taiwan and help the Americans "rein-in the Reds" on the other side of the Taiwan Strait.

Why, thank you very much America for protecting Taiwan henceforth from the Chinese Communists, whose ROC enemies you helped to unleash on Taiwan and hence rendered Taiwan and Taiwanese the PRC's new target. Notwithstanding, Taiwan is still obligated to pay dearly (financially, politically and psychologically) for your protection, military commitment and, oh yes, one must never forget the all-important "friendship" too. Interestingly, where exactly were you in the decades when the Chinese Nationalists killed, maimed, bullied and oppressed countless innocent Taiwanese? That is, when they were not too busy fending off the Reds for your convenience?

To set the record straight, Taiwan's commitment to friendship with the US is something we mainly do out of necessity and force (by America). We do very much admire the American people, the American Constitution and American idealism and hopefully we have learned great lessons from the American people's respect for liberty and human rights. However from our experience, we clearly have not benefited to the extent Schwartz has stated and certainly we have not benefited in the manner insinuated. Paradoxically, Taiwanese people have in essence, suffered greatly because of American interference.

We are now resigned to our fate. We simply want to survive (with prosperity and democracy thrown in for good measure) in this messy situation (ie, dubious international status and 450-plus missiles aimed at our homeland) bestowed upon us. For obvious reasons, we clearly cannot handle defense matters entirely on our own and we are thankful for those who help us.

However, there is surely nobody in Taiwan who believes that the Americans are "protecting" Taiwan out of friendship and the sheer goodness of their hearts. Indeed, Taiwanese are well-aware that the tens of thousands of American soldiers stationed in Northeast Asia do not exhibit American "friendship" with its Asian "allies." Instead, American military presence in the region is seen as a direct means to ensure that America's own interests in Asia-Pacific remain secure.

Simply, we Taiwanese and our beloved homeland are no more than mere pawns for the US to use vis-a-vis the PRC, and we have been in that state since World War II. Why then, would anyone dare to suggest that our admiration for the Americans lies in gratitude? Gratitude for what, exactly?

Naturally, we do give thanks on a daily basis that our first-class location in the Taiwan Strait, a location which has ensured and locked-in the promise of American protection thus far. We do thank the American military personnel who are duty-bound to defend us. But to insinuate that the Americans are protecting Taiwan on the basis of altruism is simplistic and to insinuate that the Taiwanese are grateful, is, indeed, quite incorrect.

I urge all interested parties to read George H. Kerr's Formosa Betrayed for a more historically and morally accurate of Taiwan's situation.