|
US kept Taiwan in mind during Hu trip:
Burghardt
NEW GROUND:The American Institute in Taiwan head said that
the US stuck by the Taiwan Relations Act when President Barack Obama held talks
with China’s Hu Jintao
By Shih Hsiu-chuan / Staff Reporter
The US “kept Taiwan in mind” during US President Barack Obama’s recent meetings
with Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) and rejected any Chinese request that
would have caused harm to Taiwan in negotiating the text of the two presidents’
Joint Statement, American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Chairman Raymond Burghardt
said yesterday.
Saying that China came into the negotiations on the joint statement with the
intention of trying to “break new ground,” Burghardt said the US managed to make
it a constructive statement “that in no way violate[d] any of Taiwan’s
interests.”
Burghardt, who arrived in Taipei on Sunday to brief Taiwanese authorities on
Hu’s state visit to the US last week, also held a roundtable meeting with
members of the press.
China initially wanted the document to be called a “communique” and the phrase
“[China’s] core interests” — present in the 2009 US-China Joint Statement when
Obama visited Beijing — included in the text, but the US made it clear that “we
prefer to have no joint statement rather than a statement which used the phrase
‘core interests.’”
The 2009 Joint Statement said both sides agreed to respect each other’s “core
interests, but “the phrase ‘core interests’ had caused certain difficulties and
misunderstandings,” Burghardt said, pointing to China’s territorial claims over
the South China Sea.
Burghardt’s schedule included meetings with President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九),
National Security Council Secretary-General Hu Wei-jen (胡為真) and Democratic
Progressive Party Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), among others.
Burghardt said this year’s Joint Statement had led some people to raise
questions over Washington’s stance on cross-strait political negotiations,
primarily over the part that said: “[T]he US looks forward to efforts by both
sides to increase dialogues and interactions in economic, political and other
fields.”
That part of the statement, which also appeared in the 2009 Joint Statement, has
raised concerns that it was not in line with one of the “six assurances” issued
in 1982 that the US would not push Taiwan to enter political -negotiations with
China.
Burghardt said the US position was that “we don’t play any role as mediators,
[and] have no interests to be mediators between the two sides of the strait.”
“We take no position on the negotiations between the two parties. The subjects
that they negotiate are completely up to the two sides to decide — and very
specifically up to Taiwan to decide,” Burghardt said.
“We have no impatience about it [political talks]. When to talk about subjects
that could be described as political subjects is completely something [for]
President Ma, the government and people of Taiwan to decide,” Burghardt said.
The nature of political talks “does not necessarily refer to sovereignty” in
terms of China’s claims of sovereignty over Taiwan, but could, as per
Washington’s definition, refer to “Taiwan’s participation in international
organizations.”
On Taiwan’s requests to purchase F-16C/D fighter jets from the US, Burghardt
said “it is still an open question,” adding that Washington would make its
decision based on “threats to Taiwan” and “discussions with the leadership in
Taiwan.”
Burghardt declined to comment on the progress of the evaluations.
“We will see. We just don’t talk about it until we do it. That’s really the
answer. We are in talks with Taiwan,” he said. “We look for the right time to do
things.”
In response to a question on comments made by US Secretary of Defense Robert
Gates that sparked discussions on whether the US would change its Taiwan policy
if the cross-strait security environment changed, Burghardt said Gates was
talking about something “way, way in the future.”
China has an offensive military posture against Taiwan that has a number of
components, which are “certainly not limited to missiles but including other
weapons ... cyber warfare ... Taiwan as an espionage target and the
‘Anti-Secession’ Law as a kind of legal framework for offensive posture,”
Burghardt said.
“In response [to that posture], Taiwan has a defensive military posture to
defend itself ... Maybe that situation will someday change,” he said.
“If it does change, Taiwan could come to the US and say ... we need more of this
and that. Because we listen to Taiwan and because our decision about defense aid
to Taiwan is based on Taiwan’s perception of its needs, then we will talk about
that,” Burghardt said.
Obama told China that Washington had a commitment to Taiwan and reaffirmed that
the US would abide by the Taiwan Relations Act, he said.
The position held by Ma that Taiwan needs military strength so that it can
negotiate with Beijing in a position of confidence “makes sense,” Burghardt
said. “We respect that view of the Taiwan authority. We have repeated it to
Beijing.”
|
