US overreacting to UN referendum: Yates

NO BIG THING: The former aide to US Vice President Dick Cheney said history has shown that referendums on controversial issues are 'doomed from the beginning'

By Charles Snyder
STAFF REPORTER IN WASHINGTON
Thursday, Jan 17, 2008, Page 3

"I don't feel very comfortable about the sophistication of the US approach [to the UN referendums]."－Steven Yates, former aide to US Vice President Dick Cheney

A former senior Bush administration official has criticized the US government for taking a prolonged and public stance against plans by Taiwan to hold a referendum in March on UN membership, saying the measure is likely to fail and that Washington should have realized that in the first place.

Steven Yates, a former senior Asia adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney and one-time lobbyist for Taiwan, told a seminar at the Heritage Foundation think tank in Washington on Tuesday that the experience of the two referendums during the legislative elections on Saturday, and of two similar polls during the 2004 presidential election, shows that any controversial measures in Taiwan are "doomed to fail."

Policymakers in Washington should realize this and should therefore not have made a big issue of it, he said. As a result, he felt the Bush administration's position on the UN referendum was "ill-advised."

"I don't feel very comfortable about the sophistication of the US approach, where we feel obliged to speak out publicly on domestic political matters that are likely to sort themselves out, even if they have international implications," said Yates, who now runs his own international consulting firm.

The failure of Saturday's referendums and those in 2004 means that "there might be some questions about how wise it is for the US -- as a matter of policy -- to begin responding to the prospect of a particular referendum very early in the process, if domestic partisan competition is going to defeat [the March referendum] to begin with," Yates said.

The UN referendum plan has been roundly -- and repeatedly -- criticized by US officials, most recently by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who called the plan "provocative policy."

China has long described the referendum as a move toward a declaration of independence for Taiwan, and this language was picked up last year by US officials, primarily Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte in an interview with Hong Kong's Phoenix TV in August.

The issue has soured US-Taiwan relations and it is felt that the vehemence of the US response stemmed from intense pressure from Beijing at a time when the Bush administration was in dire need of Chinese cooperation on a host of international issues.

Arguing that no controversial referendum can be adopted in Taiwan, Yates said: "If the [Chinese Nationalist Party] KMT as a party decides for its own reasons that it wants to boycott the referendum, it can't pass," Yates said.

"I think that any mathematician would say that the numbers do not favor passage on any referendum that is remotely sensitive," he said.

"And the high threshold [for passage of a referendum] in Taiwan makes those referenda almost doomed to failure from the start," he said.

Chinese predators and local ennui


Thursday, Jan 17, 2008, Page 8

China has done it again, buying a Taiwanese ally with a very large sum of money. It is highly regrettable that 42 years of Taiwanese-Malawi relations apparently meant little to a Malawian government in thrall of US$6 billion. And it is laughable that China continues to attack Taiwanese diplomatic interests with not so much as a response from supporters of the cross-strait "status quo" in the US.

This circus was designed to embarrass the Taiwanese government and President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) in particular. China signed a memorandum of understanding with Malawi on Dec. 28 in which Malawi said it would adhere to the "one China" principle, but it seems that Malawi was asked to wait until Taiwan's legislative elections were over before announcing the switch -- conveniently, it was also the day Chen embarked on a trip to cement ties with Taiwan's Central American allies.

This is a near replay of July 2002 when Nauru, in a convenient coincidence, announced it would recognize China on the day Chen was sworn in as Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman.

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) should receive kudos for -- unusually -- speaking with one voice with the DPP government in condemning China's predatory strategy.

However, the KMT is living in a fantasy land of Chinese benevolence judging from his claim yesterday that his "three noes" pledge -- promising no move toward unification or independence and no use of force -- would pave the way for long-term peace in the Taiwan Strait and satisfy Beijing.

In a world of genuine benevolence, Taiwan would have gained international space following the agreement reached between former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) during Lien's visit to China in May 2005.

We're still waiting for any sign of it.

Beijing could also have ended its hunt for Taiwan's allies as a sign of goodwill following KMT Legislator John Chiang's (蔣孝嚴) remarks last August that China would leave the allies alone if Taipei established better relations with Beijing.

In March, two referendums will be held in tandem with the presidential election. One is a DPP-initiated referendum on joining the UN under the name "Taiwan," and the other is a KMT-proposed referendum on "rejoining" the world body using the official name of the Republic of China, or any other "practical" title that would uphold the nation's dignity.

Regardless of which version the public supports, the referendum questions offer Taiwanese a fine opportunity to let the world know that their country wants to be treated with respect and recognized as part of the world community.

If neither referendum passes -- a grave possibility given the KMT's penchant for boycotting plebiscites -- the message would be bleak and difficult to undo: If Taiwanese can't assert themselves and claim a place on the world map, then how can they denounce others for swapping allegiances?

China can and should be criticized for poaching Taiwan's allies, but so should those Taiwanese who can't be bothered to stand up for themselves.