The landslide election on Saturday, March 22, of Ma Ying-jeou, a
handsome, intelligent, and articulate Harvard-educated lawyer with
rock-star popularity, as Taiwan's new president will have dramatic
and immediate implications for U.S. leadership in the Asia-Pacific
Region. Since 2003, the United States has pressured Taiwan's
pro-independence leaders to cease "provoking" China with
protestations of Taiwan's separate identity, but the "provocations"
have continued, to Washington's chagrin and Beijing's rage.
Taiwan's voters have now elected a presidential ticket committed
to better relations with China, in part because they fear losing
America's patronage. For more than six decades, Taiwan has been
seen in Asia both as one of America's most loyal allies and as a
client state covered by special legislation. Now that Taipei
promises to make peace with Beijing, Washington's treatment of
Taiwan will signal to Asia's democracies how Washington sees Asia
in the shadow of China's rise as a peer competitor in the
region.
The Bush Administration and Congress must therefore move quickly
to rebuild U.S. trade and security ties with Taiwan--by offering to
discuss trade and investment agreements, visa waiver privileges,
defense equipment approvals, senior-level security consultations,
and other matters--before democratic Taiwan begins to feel that it
has no alternative but to move closer to China. Inviting Taiwan's
president-elect and vice president- elect to Washington before
their May 20th inauguration would reassure democratic Taiwan that
it still has alternatives to a closer relationship with
authoritarian China.
Bush: Taiwan's Elections "A Beacon of
Democracy to Asia"
On March 22, Taiwan's Chinese Nationalist Party, or Kuomintang
(KMT), presidential ticket--Ma Ying-jeou and running mate Vincent
Siew, a former premier and foreign trade expert--won more than 58
percent of the vote in a stinging defeat of the Democratic
Progressive Party (DPP), which had occupied the presidency since
2000. This followed the KMT's stunning legislative victory in
January, when the party boosted its majority in the legislature
well into the veto-proof realm.
Ma Ying-jeou, a former mayor of Taiwan's capital, Taipei,
campaigned for the presidency on a platform of economic
revitalization that centered on improving economic ties across the
Taiwan Strait. Not that those ties were particularly strained to
begin with: China is Taiwan's top export customer; Taiwan's
outbound direct investment in China totaled more than $10 billion
in 2007; Taiwan's unemployment rates had fallen steadily below the
4 percent level since last November; and Taiwan's export growth is
in double digits. Thus, it is hard to see how Taiwan could be more
tightly entwined in China's economy. Still, Taiwan's voters have
been seized with a prevailing sense of economic stagnation and are
persuaded, as is the rest of Asia, that the key to prosperity is
even more trade with China. A "cross-Strait common market" with
China was the centerpiece of the Ma-Siew platform.
The Ma-Siew ticket was also helped by a pervasive sense that DPP
rule in the executive and KMT domination in the legislature had
yielded nothing but eight years of policy gridlock. Also, a string
of petty graft scandals since 2005 had irretrievably tarnished the
DPP's reputation for honesty. While the KMT may have had its own
reputation for corruption, Ma and Siew themselves are paragons of
integrity and, better still, competence.
Taiwan has a well-deserved reputation as one of Asia's most
dynamic and vibrant democracies. Its presidential campaign was
hard-fought, marked by mass rallies and substantial differences in
policy prescriptions. The large (72 percent) voter turnout inspired
President George W. Bush to call Taiwan "a beacon of democracy to
Asia and the world."
The Ma-Siew Agenda for Cross-Strait
Dialogue
The new government will have an unassailable electoral mandate
to implement its China-trade plank. When former Mayor Ma and former
Premier Siew are inaugurated on May 20, both Taiwan's executive and
legislature will be controlled by a single party that campaigned on
improved relations with China as the key to reviving the island's
flagging prosperity.
President-elect Ma's first priority, he told the foreign press
corps on March 23, will be to increase Taiwan's trade and financial
interdependence with China and foster direct tourism and business
travel across the Taiwan Strait. Taiwan had long resisted
establishing direct aviation links with China because Beijing
demanded that they be handled as "domestic" air routes, arranged by
commercial entities and not reported to the International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO) as "international" corridors. That is
likely to change. The new administration in Taipei will also lift
caps on Taiwan's investments in China and authorize new interbank
arrangements on cross-Strait financial transactions and currency
flows. Most important, President-elect Ma is committed to moving on
a cross-Strait "Peace Agreement" provided that China first
"withdraw" the more than 1,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan.[1]
This all seems reasonable to most Taiwan voters. Nearly 60
percent of them are fatigued by years of relentless diplomatic and
military pressure from Beijing to accept Chinese claims of
sovereignty (at least in principle) or face the "non-peaceful"
consequences.[2]
For nearly two decades, Taiwan has rejected Beijing's
territorial claims to the island. Taiwan's current and former
presidents have repeatedly insisted that Taiwan and China are "two
sovereign and nonsubordinate (hubulishu) nations"--a
position that Beijing's communist leadership has declared
"tantamount to independence" and a main rationale for China's
massive military and naval buildup. In 1992, Taipei and Beijing had
fleetingly reached a quasi-official understanding that there was
"one China, and each side could have its own definition," now known
as the "1992 Consensus."[3]
Within months, Beijing reiterated that the "People's Republic of
China is the sole legal government of China and Taiwan is a part of
China."[4] In November 1993, Chinese President Jiang
Zemin declared that "Taiwan is a province of the People's Republic
of China."[5] (In 2000, he declared firmly that "the KMT
ruling clique...has always remained only a local authority in
Chinese territory").[6]
Yet when Taipei rebutted the Chinese position with its own
definition that "China is a historical, geographic and cultural"
term "within which are two sovereign and non-subordinate
nations,"[7] China threatened to halt all dialogue with
Taiwan, and the "consensus" broke down. Apparently, Beijing's view
is that under this "consensus," only China may define "one China,"
while Taiwan must keep its ideas to itself.
President-elect Ma hopes to return to the "1992 Consensus," not
on the basis that there are "two sovereign and mutually
non-subordinate countries" within "one China," but rather that "one
China" is Taiwan's "Republic of China."[8] Ironically, Beijing can live
with this position. Beijing sees it as recognition that Taiwan's
international status is dependent upon "China." Indeed, the
president-elect pointed out to foreign journalists on March 23 that
"as regards the question of Taiwan's international status...Taiwan
has no choice, it must be discussed with the mainland."[9] Still,
he "hoped that the Beijing leadership would remember in its heart"
that Taiwan's people "elect their own president and parliament, and
are not to be seen as Tibet or Hong Kong."[10]
For almost 60 years, Beijing has regarded Taipei not as a
"government," but rather as a rival political party in an ancient
and unfinished civil war, refusing any contact with the "Republic
of China" government in Taipei. At his press conference, Ma
explained that his Chinese Nationalist Party will continue the
"work focus" of their cross-strait dialogue within "party-to-party"
channels set up with the Chinese Communist Party over the past
three years. Ma said he also hopes to resuscitate the
quasi-official Taipei-Beijing dialogue between Taipei's Strait
Exchange Foundation (SEF) and Beijing's Association for Relations
Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS), which was severed in 1999 after
former Taiwan President Lee Teng-hui declared a "special
nation-to-nation relationship" between Taipei and Beijing.[11]
America's Dilemma
Therein lies the problem for U.S. policymakers. For more than six
decades, the United States has explicitly declined to recognize
"Chinese" sovereignty over Taiwan, even under the "Republic of
China."[12] It has been a position that has preserved
U.S. flexibility on treating Taiwan as a separate nation for the
purposes of U.S. domestic law and the statutory U.S. defense
commitment to the island articulated in the Taiwan Relations Act.[13]
Since at least 1993, Taiwan's presidents have relied on
Washington's sovereignty agnosticism to leverage Taiwan's
international status. For Beijing, of course, this agnosticism on
Taiwan's sovereignty has been a sore point since 1971.[14]
But as China grows in both international stature and military
might into a global peer competitor, Washington has become
increasingly dependent on the kindness of Beijing to resolve
international crises from North Korea and Burma to Iran and Sudan.
In the bargain, the Bush Administration sought to hold back
Taiwan's "separatist" tendencies in return for Beijing's selective
sympathy for Washington's non-proliferation, human rights, or
genocide concerns.
This is why Taipei's creeping "independentism"--most recently in
the form of popular referenda on whether Taiwan has the right to
join the United Nations--so troubles the Bush Administration. It
sees explicit claims of an identity separate from China as a threat
to the "undetermined" status quo in the Strait and hence as
exacerbating an atmosphere of crisis when Washington has enough
crises occupying its attention.
Washington therefore has aimed to prevent Taipei from
"unilaterally changing the status quo" without,
unfortunately, doing anything to prevent China from doing so.
Over the past 12 years, Taiwan's presidents tried to get around
the "undetermined" view of Taiwan's status quo. They
asserted that Taiwan was already separate and independent from
China and had been since 1949. Hence, they saw anything that
enhanced or legitimated China's territorial claims on Taiwan as a
change in the status quo that had to be resisted. Former
President Lee Teng-hui had his "interim two-China's policy" and his
"special nation-to-nation relationship."[15] Outgoing President Chen
Shui-bian has his "each side of the Strait is its own nation"
slogan.[16]
The Bush Administration seems willing to support Taiwan's
separate international identity--if only it can be done
quietly. For example, the U.S. cautioned the United Nations
in 2007 that "UN General Assembly resolution 2758 adopted on 25
October 1971 does not in fact establish that Taiwan is a province
of the People's Republic of China (PRC)" and that "There is no
mention in Resolution 2758 of China's claim of sovereignty over
Taiwan." Moreover, U.S. diplomats urged the United Nations
Secretariat "to avoid taking sides in a sensitive matter on which
UN members have agreed to disagree for over 35 years"; otherwise,
the "United States will be obliged to disassociate itself on a
national basis from such position."[17] This was done in
secret.
Publicly, the paradoxical effect was that Washington tended to
punish Taipei for resisting Beijing's changes in the
status quo (through the massive military deployments on the
Taiwan Strait, undermining Taiwan's status in international
organizations, and the promulgation of laws declaring Taiwan's
"movements toward independence" as acts of war).
Now, the Bush Administration must choose whether to work with
Taiwan's new government to preserve the island as an important
partner in democratic Asia or to continue to nudge Taiwan deeper
into China's orbit. The choice Washington makes will be seen by
America's allies and friends in Asia as a bellwether of a strategic
realignment in the Western Pacific and Eurasia.
It will be a delicate maneuver. On one hand, China's military
might has expanded exponentially over the past decade and continues
apace. Beijing now feels comfortable threatening war (or rather
"non-peaceful means") to keep Taiwan from an explicit de
jure rejection of sovereign ties with China. On the other, the
United States has a statutory commitment, in the form of the Taiwan
Relations Act, to "maintain the capacity" to defend Taiwan for the
very good reason that Taiwan is a fellow democracy.
What the Administration and Congress
Should Do
Taiwan's voters, as well as their elected leaders, feel
increasingly isolated, and there is no doubt that the Ma-Siew
ticket was seen in Taipei as the one favored by Washington. But it
cannot be in America's interests to let Taiwan--a vibrant Asian
democracy, America's tenth-largest trading partner, and a
significant security partner in the Western Pacific--be browbeaten
into an unwanted relationship with Asia's largest dictatorship.
While the United States surely welcomes an easing of tension across
the Strait, Washington must not abandon Ma Ying-jeou and Vincent
Siew to China's gentle graces.
Nor must Taiwan's citizens be left to believe they have no
choice but China. The Administration and Congress should
therefore:
Invite Taiwan's President and Vice President-elect to
Washington. A visit to Washington by Ma Ying-jeou and Vincent
Siew before their inauguration--that is, before they are
"officials"--would be a message to Taiwan that the United States
continues to value Taiwan's partnership and respect its
democracy.
Launch negotiations on a free trade agreement (FTA).
Taiwan is already under pressure from the United States to ease
trade restrictions with China, but Taipei will have no leverage and
no bargaining power unless the United States itself opens serious
FTA talks with Taiwan. Like Singapore and South Korea, Taiwan meets
all the criteria of a solid FTA partner, and it is quite possible
that even the free-trade skeptics in Congress would find much
benefit in a Taiwan FTA.[18]
Offer a Visa Waiver Program (VWP) road map. The VWP is a
powerful symbol of U.S. friendship with partner democracies around
the world. Taiwan has been an active partner in the U.S. Container
Security Initiative and other counter-terrorism efforts; it has a
biometric travel document program, a database infrastructure to
handle electronic travel approvals, and a nonimmigrant visa refusal
rate of around 3 percent. The Departments of State and Homeland
Security should begin consultations with Taiwan on a road map for
VWP participation.
Approve Taiwan's Letter of Request for F-16C/D fighter
aircraft. Last year, the Bush Administration has repeatedly and
inexplicably refused to accept Taiwan's formal request for
replacement fighter aircraft. There has been speculation that the
White House sought to punish Taiwan's president for supporting U.N.
membership referenda. The Administration's continued rebuffs of
Taiwan's F-16C/D requests would be an ominous signal of
Washington's intention to consign responsibility for Taiwan's
security to China.
Open a U.S.-Taiwan strategic dialogue. Washington has an
interest in whatever "peace agreement" is structured across the
Strait. More to the point, getting China's ballistic missiles
"withdrawn" from the Strait is a good idea only if one knows where
they get re-deployed. In a broader sense, a structured strategic
dialogue between command military and Cabinet-level officials from
the U.S. and Taiwan is essential if the two sides are to continue a
security partnership in Asia. While it need not (and, indeed,
should not) be publicized, Washington should invite the
participation of other Asian allies and friends.
Conclusion
America's Asian partners fear that the United States is a
Pacific power in decline, and they see China moving to fill the
void. Ceding Taiwan to China's sphere would go far to establish
Leninist-mercantilist China as the rule-maker in Asia for
transnational trade and financial structures, the chief of a new
Asian security architecture, and the patron of a new ideology of
authoritarian state mercantilism.
How Washington treats Taiwan, a long-time friend, will signal to
the rest of Asia how Washington sees its role in the Asia-Pacific
region. Reassuring Taiwan of America's continued friendship will
reassure America's democratic partners in the region that
Washington actually places some value on a country that President
Bush calls "a beacon of democracy to Asia."
John J. Tkacik, Jr., is
Senior Research Fellow in China, Taiwan, and Mongolia Policy in the
Asian Studies Center at The Heritage Foundation.
[1]Chen
Luowei, "Ma yu Beijing: Tai fei Gang Zang, hetan qian xian che dan"
[Ma urges Beijing to understand that Taiwan is not Hong Kong or
Tibet; prior to peace talks, withdraw the missiles], Zhongguo
Shibao, Taipei, March 24, 2008, p. A1.
[2]Article 8 of China's 2005 "Anti Secession Law"
states that "In the event that...that major incidents entailing
Taiwan's secession from China should occur...the state shall employ
non-peaceful means and other necessary measures to protect China's
sovereignty and territorial integrity." See "'Fan Fenlie Guojia Fa'
Quanwen" ['Anti Secession Law' complete text], Xinhua News Agency,
March 14, 2005, at http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2005-03/
14/content_2694168.htm.
[3]There is considerable debate about who said
what to whom. On November 16, 1992, China's quasi-official Taiwan
instrumentation proposed that "Both sides of the Strait uphold the
one-China principle and strive to seek the country's unification;
however, political implications of 'one-China' should not be
involved in working-level talks between the two sides of the
Strait." There was no response from the Taiwan side. However,
according to a report several years later, Taiwan's Central News
Agency said on March 1, 2001, that in meetings in Hong Kong with
its Chinese counterpart on October 28-30, 1992, Taiwan's
instrumentality "proposed that the two sides 'declare orally that
they will put aside the issue' until the natural political
integration between the two sides can be brought about through
exchanges in economy and culture."
[4]On
August 30, 1993, the Taiwan Affairs Office and the Information
Office under the State Council of the People's Republic of China
issued a White Paper on The Taiwan Question and the
Reunification of China.
[5]Wang
Jinghong, "Taibei Burong Biansun, Beijing Peng Ying Dingzi,
Shuangfang dou shi you junbei erlai, Zhonggong fan guixian zi
zhengzhi, Wo ti fanji weihu quanyi" (Taipei won't tolerate insults,
Beijing hits hard nail, both sides came prepared, We launch
counterstrike to protect interests], United Daily News,
Taipei, November 24, 1993, p. 2.
[7]Wang
Jinghong, "Taibei Burong Biansun, Beijing Peng Ying Dingzi,
Shuangfang dou shi you junbei erlai, Zhonggong fan guixian zi
zhengzhi, Wo ti fanji weihu quanyi."
[8]See
Dr. Ying-jeou Ma, Mayor of Taipei and Chairman of the Kuomintang,
"Bridging the Divide: A Vision for Peace in East Asia," speech at
the London School of Economics and Political Science, February 13,
2006. "We will try to resume the disrupted cross-Strait talks under
the so-called 'Consensus of 1992'. This is a tacit consensus
reached by the two sides in 1992 in Hong Kong accepting the
'one-China principle' but allowing different interpretations by
each side, in order to find the common ground and cement mutual
trust in the first place. For us, the 'China' is Republic of China;
for them, it is the People's Republic of China. But we won't let
the different interpretations obstruct the two sides' exchanges in
other areas."
[9]Chen
Luowei, "Ma yu Beijing: Tai fei Gang Zang, hetan qian xian che
dan."
[11]Chen Luowei, "Chongqi liang hui xieshang bu
pai teshi zhuanhua; Ma: ruyou biyao, kaolu fang Zhong" [Reopen
SEF-ARATS consultation, won't send special envoy; Ma: If needed, I
can consider visiting China]. Zhongguo Shibao, March 24,
2008, p. A2.
[12]As recently as June 2007, a State Department
letter noted that "Although the United States recognizes the PRC
Government as the sole legal government of China, we have not
formally recognized Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan. In fact, we
have not made any determination as to Taiwan's political status."
Letter from Sue Bremner, Deputy Director, Office of Taiwan
Coordination, June 26, 2007. The legal rationale for this position
was conveyed in a "top secret" State Department position paper to
Secretary of State John Foster Dulles in October 1954, which noted
that the "future" status of Taiwan and the Pescadores "was
deliberately left undetermined, and the U.S. as a principal victor
over Japan has an interest in their ultimate future. We are not
willing that that future should be one which would enable a hostile
regime to endanger the defensive position which is so vital in
keeping the Pacific a friendly body of water." See Foreign
Relations of the United States, 1952-1954, Volume XIV, China
and Japan (Part 1) (Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office,
1985), p. 760.
[13]See 22 USC 3302, Taiwan Relations Act, P.L.
96-8, April 10, 1979. Several revisions were made in Public Law
96-8 when it was codified. Sections 1 and 18 of the Public Law were
omitted, as was Section 12(d). In addition, the United States Code
contains a section not included in the original Act, Section 3310a.
The United States Code version is the authoritative version of the
Act.
[14]For example, in October 1971, Chinese Premier
Zhou Enlai insisted to Henry Kissinger: "On our side, we will
certainly not give up Taiwan, or accept a so-called undetermined
status for Taiwan in exchange for a seat in the UN." See
"Memorandum of Conversation" between Prime Minister Chou En-lai,
People's Republic of China, and Dr. Henry A. Kissinger, Assistant
to the President for National Security Affairs, October 21, 1971,
4:42-7:17 p.m., at www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/nixon/e13/72602.htm.
[17]A non-paper to this effect was submitted to
the U.N. Secretariat in August 2007. It remains confidential. See
John J. Tkacik, Jr., "Dealing with Taiwan's Referendum on the
United Nations," Heritage Foundation WebMemo No. 1606,
September 10, 2007, at www.heritage.org/Research/AsiaandthePacific/wm1606.cfm.