UPDATE: The government is saying that State hasn't done this and it is just the usual pro-Blue paper bullshit.Minister of Foreign Affairs James Huang said Monday the United States has yet to respond to Taiwan's transit requests and reports of rejection by the media are purely speculation.
Huang made the assertion after swearing in new ambassadors and representatives to be based abroad. Chinese-language media have claimed that the U.S. will not allow President Chen Shui-bian to make transit stops on its mainland en route to Central America later this month, displeased at Chen's plan to call a referendum on whether the country should seek to join the Untied Nations under the designation of Taiwan.
Huang said it is too early for the media to draw the conclusion as the U.S. has not answered Chen's transit requests. The minister said he believed the U.S. will handle the matter in keeping with the protocol of comfort, convenience, safety and dignity.
Hopefully I am totally wrong and can put an apology on my blog for abusing the State Department when Chen lands in San Francisco or New York. Not to mention for believing UDN. I'm going home now to write "I will not believe UDN" one thousand times....meanwhile here's the old post, unchanged:
The State Department's ongoing campaign against Taiwan reached another nadir this month. First, newspapers in Taipei are reporting that State is only permitting Chen Shui-bian to land for 2-3 hours in Alaska or Hawaii when he visits Central America later this month:
The United States, angry at Taiwan's bid to join the United Nations, plans to restrict Taiwan President ChenShui-bian's transit through the US when he visits Central America later this month, a newspaper said on Thursday.
The United Daily News (UDN) said the US plans to ban Chen's jet from landing on the US mainland. Instead, it can only make a 2-3 hour refuelling stop in Alaska or Hawaii.
To avoid being humiliated by the US treatment, Taiwan is looking for alternative routes for Chen to go to Honduras for the August 23-25 summit with the leaders of Taiwan's Central American allies, UDN said.
It's been said before, but let's say it again. Taiwan cannot enter the UN because China has a veto there. Thus, nothing can happen. Once again, the State Department is getting all frazzled about nothing, just as it did when Chen rectified the names of certain companies, "froze" the NUC, and spoke at the FAPA banquet, or when pixels in the form of Chen Shui-bian appeared at the National Press Club -- none of which had any concrete effects. State has already signaled that it is angry over the UN entry issue -- there's no need for still more signaling. Time to grow up and let Chen land in the US somewhere -- especially since the House just passed a bill by unanimous voice vote that lifts restrictions on visits by high-level Taiwanese officials to the US.
Yet another reason to let Chen land is that State is already punishing Taiwan in more serious and concrete ways. Conservative China watcher and Taiwan friend John Tkacik of Heritage wrote in the latest issue of Defense News that State is blocking the sale of arms to Taiwan.
The budget, approved after the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) majority in the legislature agreed to release the funds, called for spending some US$1.3 billion on the aircraft and US$800 million on the missile batteries, plus a separate US$6 million to study the purchase of diesel electric submarines.The official letter of request to buy the two systems has "been in the Pentagon for weeks," Tkacik wrote in the latest issue of the weekly military affairs publication.
The Pentagon has prepared a notification package that must be sent to Congress for its consideration before any sale is made, but it has been waiting for the necessary State Department green light to send the package, which the department has so far failed to give.
"State Department officers," Tkacik wrote, "now tell the Pentagon they don't want the package to move. They say they fear approving the package might `embolden' Taiwan's president to move ahead with a local referendum on Taiwan's entry into the United Nations."
Behind the State Department's opposition to the sales, Tkacik said, is the department's fear of the Chinese reaction, especially in view of Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill's need for Chinese cooperation on the North Korean nuclear issue.
"Internally, State Department officials acknowledge that the eagerness of Christopher Hill to get something concrete out of his North Korean denuclearization efforts means he will not entertain any policy decision that might anger Beijing. And Taiwan weapon sales are a sure ... way for the State Department to get an agitated visit from the Chinese ambassador," Tkacik wrote.
The State Department refused to comment on the issue or on Tkacik's report.
Way to keep the peace in the Taiwan Strait, guys. Deterrence of attack is based on Taiwan's access to advanced weaponry. If we don't sell them the aircraft, the odds of war rise, not fall.
The irony of State's position is clear. It accuses Chen Shui-bian of taking actions that will raise tensions in the Straits, even though they can have no concrete consequences, while at the same time, State itself takes actions that will have very concrete consequences for peace in the Straits.
[Taiwan] [US] [China] [Chen Shui-bian] [State Department]
19 comments:
Mainland China is far more important for US than Taiwan: more money, bigger, more people, more power and influence, smarter people. Mainland > Taiwan. Taiwan is used to keep the mainland on check. However, the mainland is used to keep Russia in check. Strategists at the State Department are not stupid. The only stupid people are in the DPP administrating who do not see the geopolitical changes and who have overplayed their hand.
Regardless how many weapons we sell to Taiwan, Taiwan military is too small comparing to China's. I hate any analyses that saying China will have hard time taking Taiwan. Any advance weapons we sold to Taiwan will only end up in China's hands if a war break out. Also, I think the rule is very clear, if you want our weapons, you better listen to us. And Chen clearly doesn't listen to us that well.
Btw, did one of US cabinet member go to Taiwan and beg Taiwan to buy US CDO bonds? Our HUD secretary just asked China to buy CDO bonds in hope to stabilize our over-heated housing market last month.
I won't even be surprised that US already sold Taiwan out.
Well if State wants to leave Taiwan friendless, it'll get a rude awakening when Taiwan makes a universal declaration of independence in the future.
Because if Taiwan ever decides the US is no real friend, it will stop restraining itself and declare itself an independent country. And there will be nothing the US can do to stop it, other than give in to Taiwanese demands - even that might not do it.
I think Taiwan can't be "Mr. Nice Guy" anymore. Taiwan needs to go ahead and do something at this point. Withholding arms packages? WTF?
Taiwan might as well go ahead and declare independence or do something that will wake people up.
"Mainland China is far more important for US than Taiwan: more money, bigger, more people, more power and influence, smarter people. Mainland > Taiwan. "
That's the general propaganda China supporters are throwing at Taiwanese people these days...it plays on the the "great china" mindset that if you're not the biggest in size or population, then you're worthless. You can replace Taiwan in that statement with any other country, for example, Ireland: "Mainland China is far more important for US than Ireland: more money, bigger, more people, more power and influence, smarter people. Mainland > Ireland. " The statement remains true, but does that mean if China decides to invade Ireland, nobody is going to do anything about it?
It's not about the size, it's also about the people, culture, beliefs and way of life. As for money...if it's all about the money, then the US wouldn't support Israel either. Why risk supporting a single country and piss off every other country in the Middle East with oil supplies? I am not saying I agree or disagree with the US policy in Israel, btw, but I am simply saying that there's more in the equation than just large population = large economy = support.
Taiwan might as well go ahead and declare independence or do something that will wake people up.
That's exactly what China wants, and what we, US, don't want. However, I bet US media will try to do their best to help US government to make a non-issue i.e. not reporting as a serious event (I could be wrong about this though).
"Mainland China is far more important for US than Ireland: more money, bigger, more people, more power and influence, smarter people. Mainland > Ireland. "
Interesting that you bring up Ireland. I wonder when US or the world is going to force English out from Northern Ireland. Giggles...
Why risk supporting a single country and piss off every other country in the Middle East wi
th oil supplies?
Clearly you don't live in the US and don't understand why both left and right support Israel. The far right's belief on Israel is almost laughable but Southern Baptist and Christian Coalition are very powerful. Pat Robertson is an anti-semi, yet he is one of the strongest supporters of Israel. Do you find it odd? As of Middle East in general, although they are all suppose to be brothers, but they sure like to kill each others when they have the chance (that's actually the card that US is trying to play for long time).
arty: "Any advance weapons we sold to Taiwan will only end up in China's hands if a war break out."
Did I read you right? You sounded as though that Taiwanese will just hand over the advanced weapons to China without a fight if China invaded Taiwan. I wonder how you made that conclusion.
"I think the rule is very clear, if you want our weapons, you better listen to us. And Chen clearly doesn't listen to us that well."
I was stunned to see such a statement.
First, why should Chen listen to US ? Taiwan paid to buy those weapons. It's not like charity given as a gift by the US government. Actually Taiwan paid a lot more than the weapons worth. You sounded as though that beside those large sum of money Taiwan should pay her soul to US to get the weapons.
Secondly, you sounded that Taiwan is begging US for the arm sale to an extent that Taiwan President has to turn himself into a slave of US. But looking back at the recent years of Taiwan-US interactions regarding the arm sale, which side is pushing harder to make the deal ? Didn't you know that it's the US side? The fact is that US is much more eager to sell weapons to Taiwan ! I shoulda rephrased the sentence in my previous paragraph:
"Taiwan paid a lot more than the weapons worth"
to:
"US asks a lot more than the weapons worth"
And lastly, Chen is a president elected in a democratic way by people of Taiwan. He has the pressure to fulfill Taiwanese needs; He represents Taiwan, and has the obligation to answer to Taiwanese. He is not some ordinary guy who can just listen to the government of a foreign country. Saying something like "if you want our weapons, you better listen to us" is nonsense, unless you still think that Chen is an authoritarian like Chiang kai-shek.
"I won't even be surprised that US already sold Taiwan out."
That I agree. Not like US didn't do that before.
Just want to point out one thing:
If the US sold off Taiwan to China, one forseeable consequence is Taiwan becomes an outpost of China and the security of Japan is immediately at stake. (Not that a war is imminent, but a regional cold war might be a possibility, until the Japanese decides China is the new boss.)
In essence, the sovereignty of Taiwan (be it "status quo" or independence) and the security of Japan are one package.
Runsun,
Sure Taiwan will fight but whatever left will be taken by China. It doesn't even have to be working weapons. For example, all F-16 has hard wired identification tag (an armored box that will identify you as friendly; it is pretty much a hard wired decoder that will send out the correct signal when it is getting pinged). I am pretty sure China want to have a look physically.
Didn't you know that it's the US side? The fact is that US is much more eager to sell weapons to Taiwan!
Clearly not eager engouh, hence the delay.
He is not some ordinary guy who can just listen to the government of a foreign country. Saying something like "if you want our weapons, you better listen to us" is nonsense, unless you still think that Chen is an authoritarian like Chiang kai-shek.
You know the key is not what Taiwan people think. The key is what we,US, think. If Taiwan really think so high and mighty of themselves. Stop coming by US (what Chen wants to do; 747 can fly further without refuel?? or get a 777). Stop saying US is obligated to defend Taiwan if China comes knocking. And declear independence now! Stop playing the political game that Taiwan has no chance to win. Ever heard of "talk is cheap."
Personally (I hope China think the same way), China should finish the Taiwan bussiness when we are tight up in Iraq (no later than 2010). It will be ever harder if China wait, and the potential of a boarder war will also increase. Btw, can anyone answer where is the Enterprise carrier group right now (the legendary Pacific guard)? hehe...
runsun makes a thinking error: without the US, Taiwan would have been formally part of the PRC long time ago. arty is right about the deal: we make sure you are not ruled by Beijing, and you are our 'slave'. The Romans knew how that kind of relationship works, why does Taiwan not understand that the US-Taiwan relationship is just a patron-client relation? The idea that Taiwan is a 'normal country' is just ridiculous: it is not, and the rules do not apply here.
Clearly you don't live in the US and don't understand why both left and right support Israel. The far right's belief on Israel is almost laughable but Southern Baptist and Christian Coalition are very powerful. Pat Robertson is an anti-semi, yet he is one of the strongest supporters of Israel. Do you find it odd? As of Middle East in general, although they are all suppose to be brothers, but they sure like to kill each others when they have the chance (that's actually the card that US is trying to play for long time).
That's exactly my point, I do find it odd. Which is why I say it's more complicated than just population and money. There are other issues involved in these matters.
But I do agree with you a a lot of things, especially the part where you said word is cheap. If Taiwan wants to be independent, then they should have the balls to stand up and say it...there's no way Taiwan can win at the political game at this point. Because who is going to stand up and support a country when the people of that country don't even have the balls to do it themselves?
Okay guys, start owning up to your real motivations. Trying to pretend Taiwan is a "client" state of the U.S. is to only increase and justify Chinese nationalist anger at Taiwanese independence and to insult the idea of an independent, democratic, and free Taiwan. Well try harder. It's not working.
Taiwan's security is closely tied to decisions made in Japan and the U.S. Sure. The U.S.'s and Japan's economic well-being and thus security is tied to decisions made in Saudi Arabia. Are you going to claim U.S. and Japan to be client states of Saudi Arabia? The prospect of an occupied, non-freely oil-producing Saudi Arabia was enough to force the U.S. to intervene in Iraq-Kuwait the first time around. Is the complex entity that is the U.S. simply reducible to "the U.S. is Saudi Arabia's bitch".
Likewise, though the U.S. and Japan hold a monopoly on responsibility in maintaining a balance of power in East Asia, the interruption of a free Taiwan would mean the shutdown of semiconductor manufacturing worldwide with very little excess capacity anywhere else. Interdependence cuts both ways, and maybe in another 50 years, we'll see states as being much less cohesive because of this interdependence. Till then, the attempt to insult the freedom enjoyed by the people of Taiwan is just humorously off the mark. And in any case, interdependence means everyone's a bitch to someone.
Anonymous(#1) said..."Taiwan is used (by US) to keep the mainland on check. However, the mainland is used to keep Russia in check."
It sounds like a cold-war mentality to me. IMO, Russia has already faded out and her influence is much less than China has now. On the contrary, China is rising rapidly and is currently the #1 threat to US in terms of US interests in the Pacific regions. How on earth a #1 player would ally with the #2 player, his biggest threat, in order to beat his #-who-know-what threat? It's not only unnecessary but also risky (of giving China more chances to become more threatening).
Anonymous (#?) said... Just want to point out one thing:
If the US sold off Taiwan to China, one foreseeable consequence is Taiwan becomes an outpost of China and the security of Japan is immediately at stake. (Not that a war is imminent, but a regional cold war might be a possibility, until the Japanese decides China is the new boss.)"
EXACTLY!
I'll add one more point: not only Japan's security will be immediately in jeopardy, but also US interests in Asia, and possibly in the long run US homeland security. Check out one of my old articles:
Why Taiwan is Important to USA
"In essence, the sovereignty of Taiwan (be it "status quo" or independence) and the security of Japan are one package."
Plus US' foreign interests.
Arty said... "Sure Taiwan will fight but whatever left will be taken by China."
If you said it this way, I wouldn't have had any objection.
But, isn't it a common sense that when A conquers B, whatever weapons B has left fall into A's hand?
"Clearly not eager enough, hence the delay."
Exactly. Clearly US more eager to sell weapons to Taiwan than Taiwan wants to buy weapons from US. With this context, shouldn't I rephrase your sentence:
"if you want our weapons, you better listen to us."
to:
"if you want to sell us weapons, you better listen to us."
??
"You know the key is not what Taiwan people think. The key is what we,US, think."
You are drifting away. No matter what the American think, it doesn't change the fact that Chen is a democratically elected President who has to answer to his people first. Your thinking is that Chen has to listen to US government, but that just not a way a democratically elected president should do. This applies to all democratic countries in the world. If a president can just disregard his people's calling and listen to a foreign government instead, then he is NOT a democratic president. Your way of thinking is on the line of authoritarian country, not a democratic one.
So the key point here is: do you, arty, think Chen should act as a democratic president, or an authoritarian one? I don't think this has anything to do with how American think.
"Stop saying US is obligated to defend Taiwan if China comes knocking. And declear independence now! Stop playing the political game that Taiwan has no chance to win."
C'mon, do you really think that American role in protecting Taiwan came from the nature of good virtue? The fact is that US hold Taiwan as a dear ally when she needs Taiwan to be an ally, and sold Taiwan out when she thought selling out Taiwan fits her national interests. It's never about freedom, never about justice, never about democracy. It's all about American interests.
Get back to read how Nixon sold out Taiwan. Get back to review how Bush hands shake with China for coordinating anti-terrorist attacks. Since the very beginning, the design of "Status Quo" is a plan to keep China from stepping out of the land. The reason that US insists in the Status Quo is that it is the situation that makes US gain the most benefit.
So wake up, buddy, it's all for US own benefit. I have no problem with that, after all a country should put her own interests on priority. But thinking that as a benefaction US gave/give to Taiwan ? No way !
Anonymous said... "runsun makes a thinking error: without the US, Taiwan would have been formally part of the PRC long time ago."
That statement is totally baseless. Conquering a big island needs a strong navy as well as good coordination between army, navy and air force, including excellent logistic support. PRC just didn't have that. Therefore the possibility for PRC to take over Taiwan at that time was slim, even without US supporting Taiwan.
Let me remind you one piece of Chinese history: in 1644 when Manchurian came down from the north to invade Ming Dynasty, it took them less than a year or two to conquer most part of China main land, but it took them another 40 years to take over the east-south area (including Taiwan). Another example is when Cao Cao (曹操) led 0.8 million land army to invade south but the entire army was annihilated by a navy 10 times smaller (in around 250 AD, i believe, in the Three-Kingdom era). It just shows that the river/sea terrain poses much more challenge to an invading army, and a strong land army doesn't guarantee a victory in water/sea war.
That's exactly my point, I do find it odd. Which is why I say it's more complicated than just population and money. There are other issues involved in these matters.
Btw, most people know why Pat Robertson support Israel. He even stated that Israel has to be created again for it to be destoryed according to the Bible.
U.S. to intervene in Iraq-Kuwait the first time around. Is the complex entity that is the U.S. simply reducible to "the U.S. is Saudi Arabia's bitch".
You do know we kind of okayed Kuwait invasion. Clearly, Iraq misunderstood us before Kuwait invasion as we still keep saying according to the US officials (giggles).
So the key point here is: do you, arty, think Chen should act as a democratic president, or an authoritarian one?
So why he hasn't declear Taiwan as an independent nation. I am waiting because according to you (am I wrong? not so sure) that what Taiwan people wants. Or put it up for a vote by the people, he definitely has the power to do so for the voting part. Is he afraid of the people will vote it down?
So wake up, buddy, it's all for US own benefit. I have no problem with that, after all a country should put her own interests on priority. But thinking that as a benefaction US gave/give to Taiwan ? No way !
Really, let's see, we own China over a trillion dollars. We need China to buy our T-bonds. Now we even ask China to buy our CDO bonds. US' economics is really screwing up this time around, and I think we need at least half a trillion to fix it. I will sell Taiwan for that :). Don't believe me, come back in 3 months (this coming week will be very ugly for the US stock).
Also, let's not talk about money, what will be the benefit for US to fight a nuclear war with China for Taiwan? China already stated that they will go nuclear facing US.
Btw, I think China will bill us out of this equity crash but it may not be pretty, and the only reason will be to help its best customers. However, I think China will ask something more :).
PRC just didn't have that. Therefore the possibility for PRC to take over Taiwan at that time was slim, even without US supporting Taiwan.
PRC took Hainan without trouble. You argument will only work if US supports Taiwan and put US troops in Taiwan. Remeber if KMT didn't go to Taiwan, there will be no army in Taiwan at the time of Chinese civil war. There will be no invasion because there is no defender. Duh? Maybe KMT should retreat to Hainan instead of Taiwan.
There's an easier way to determine the US's behavior.
China = whale
Taiwan = football
Whenever the football--in the name of Chen or Hsieh or whomever--lands in the US, it gets kicked off again.
You can't kick a whale, and sometimes tensions rise when the football tries to act above its level of influence. Say, if it lands on the whale...
Post a Comment