That Provocative Name "Taiwan"

Ed Cody at the Washington Post has an article on the referendum that asks the government here to enter the UN under the name Taiwan in which he interviews President Chen:

President Chen Shui-bian, dismissing U.S. objections as appeasement of China, said Taiwan will press ahead with a controversial referendum on whether the self-ruled island should apply for U.N. membership under the name Taiwan.

Chen's defiant stand, outlined in frank language during an interview Friday, raised the prospect of a rocky period in Taiwan's relations with the Bush administration and a rise of tension across the volatile 100-mile strait separating Taiwan from mainland China.

China and the United States have complained that the referendum, which would have little practical effect, in fact is designed to promote a change in the island's official name, from Republic of China to Taiwan. This, both governments charged, could be read as a unilateral change in the island's status, something China's rulers have said they will not tolerate.

The island has been called the Republic of China since Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist forces fled here after being defeated by the Communists of Mao Zedong in 1949. China has said it must one day reunite with the mainland and has vowed to use force if necessary to prevent a decisive move toward independence -- such as changing the official name to Taiwan.

But Chen, an ardent independence advocate who is nearing the end of his second four-year term, said the idea of such a referendum has been endorsed by the main opposition group, the Nationalist Party, as well as his own People's Progressive Party and was supported by 71 percent of Taiwanese citizens questioned in a national poll. Canceling the plans would amount to frustrating the democratic rights of Taiwan's 23 million people to express their views and guide government policies, he said.

Hang on, because we'll come back to this. The article actually correctly recognizes that this is a domestic political move:

Although the plan still faces legal challenges, the government has said it will be held at the same time as the election to choose Chen's successor, scheduled for March 22. This will have the effect of focusing voters' attention on the independence issue, which is likely to boost the chances of Chen's party in the presidential vote and in legislative elections scheduled Jan. 12.

The Nationalist Party, although its presidential candidate Ma Yin-jeou favors de-emphasizing the independence struggle, decided Wednesday to endorse the referendum, while keeping the name issue open. A key Nationalist leader said the party acted out of electoral considerations, not wanting to appear anti-nationalist to centrist voters.

That second paragraph is quite interesting. It names that KMT as the "Nationalist" party -- why not go whole hog and call it the "Chinese Nationalist Party" so readers would have a better grip on why it might not want to appear "anti-nationalist?" Unfortunately the paragragh refers to two different kinds of nationalism -- Chinese nationalism, in the form of the KMT, and Taiwanese nationalism in the form of centrist voters, without explicitly naming either, resulting in a highly confusing formulation.

The remark by the KMT official cited here is a good example of how far the island has come, which Cody's article recognizes. The growth of the Taiwanese identity has become so pervasive that the KMT cannot put itself in a position to openly defy it. I met up with a friend last night who teaches here. Each year, he tells me, he gives his students a demographic survey, and every year now, for nationality everyone is putting down Taiwan.

Cody wrote, referring to the defeat in Iraq and the way it has completely dominated the Bush Administration's foreign policy:

Against that background, the State Department last month issued a strong statement laying out U.S. objections to the referendum. The objections also have been conveyed in private diplomatic exchanges, with U.S. officials arguing it would unnecessarily raise tensions with Beijing.

"The U.S. opposes any initiative that appears designed to change Taiwan's status unilaterally," the statement said. "This would include a referendum on whether to apply to the U.N. under the name Taiwan."

A Washington analyst told me privately that the Bush Administration's view of Taiwan is determined by what the State Department thinks. This means that at the moment Beijing has a powerful influence over US Taiwan policy, since the State Department has essentially adopted Beijing's position on Taiwan. The State Department felt it important to convey a warning about the UN referendum, even though if the referendum passes, Taiwan has no chance of entering the UN under any name, since China can veto any such act. Once again, State acted where it did not need to act. Even longtime supporters of the island, such as Randall Shriver, have been telling Taiwan not to hold this referendum -- though Shriver points out, correctly, that a referendum defeated by low turnout would be bad for democracy. Really, there is no need for such commentary -- China isn't going to declare war over a successful referendum when it has a veto in the UN.

It is important to note that the article does not recognize -- as the State Department still does not openly aver -- that Being Provoked is a policy choice for Beijing -- anyone remember them lambasting Taiwan for getting rid of the National Assembly, reducing the number of legislators, or any of several other changes? Have they crapped all over the KMT for proposing that the party's charter be amended to include the word "Taiwan?" Nope. Beijing's "provocation" campaign is aimed to discredit the Taiwan-centered actions of Chen Shui-bian. Moves by other actors are greeted with silence.

One thing that's striking about all this hu-ha over Taiwan from the US side is how everything that the US has here is named "Taiwan." The officially unofficial US representative office is not called the American Institute in the Republic of China. The major legislation governing our relations with the island is not The Republic of China Relations Act or Relations With a Renegade Province of China Act. Within the State Department there's a bureaucrat who mans the Taiwan Desk, not the Taiwan Province desk or the Republic of China desk. If the US gets its knickers in a knot whenever the name Taiwan pops up in international discourse, why does it encourage all this splittism by slapping the Taiwan brand on all its products?

In today's Taipei Times former AIT head and longtime Taiwan supporter Nat Bellocchi also observed that the US reaction is overwrought and harmful to the long-term development of democracy:

The US should not meddle in this issue because the people of Taiwan have shown they support having referendums. The two main political parties say they have the right to hold a referendum on joining the UN, but are arguing over the name that should be used for Taiwan. It is not a good idea for a country to get involved in other countries' democratic processes.

Further, in next year's presidential election, there will be a decision on a new president and there may be two referendums, one on the UN and the other on the KMT's stolen assets. A total of 113 legislators will have been elected and its impact will be felt. The results of this and the presidential decision will determine Taiwan's future. It is likely to be even more tense than 2004.

As for getting the right people in the US government to better understand the complicated and sensitive issues surrounding Taiwan, there must be some process of dialogue between the two sides -- a real dialogue between senior experts from a variety of government agencies -- perhaps given a short unofficial time for them -- who can meet periodically and press for consensus on important issues.

As Therese Shaheen pointed out a couple of weeks ago, US-Taiwan dialogue has been hampered by the increasingly draconian restrictions on US-Taiwan exchanges by the State Department -- and then Chen Shui-bian takes the hit for the problems in US-Taiwan relations. Bellocchi's call for increased exchanges recognizes this problem.

The Taiwan identity is growing and will eventually engulf everyone on the island. The young embrace it entirely. People in Washington need to adjust their thinking to the new reality that is going to shape Taiwan-China-US relations for years to come.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [Chen Shui-bian] [State Department]