State Says Taiwan UN Drive Violating Status Quo

Both the French and British governments recognize how great is the sacrifice thus required of the Czechoslovak Government in the cause of peace. But because that cause is common both to Europe in general and in particular to Czechoslovakia herself they have felt it their duty jointly to set forth frankly the conditions essential to secure it. -- Formal note to government of Czechoslovakia, September, 1938.

Big news out of the State Department, with reports from Xinhua to the Taipei Times. Xinhua's editorial says it all:

China appreciates the United States' opposition to the referendum scheme by Taiwan authorities to seek UN membership, said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao Tuesday.

Liu made the comment after media reports said U.S. Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte had expressed opposition to Taiwan authorities' attempt to push for a plan of referendum on the island's entry into the United Nations in the name of Taiwan.

In an interview with Hong Kong-based Phoenix TV, John Negroponte said the U.S sees the idea of referendum as "a mistake" and "a step towards a declaration of independence of Taiwan, towards an alteration of the status quo."

Liu said China appreciates the U.S reiteration of its opposition to the referendum scheme of Taiwan authorities.

"Opposing and checking 'Taiwan independence' is key to peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait and in the Asia-Pacific region," said Liu.

"The Taiwan authorities' moves run counter to the tide of history and their attempts are doomed to failure," he said.

The Taipei Times reported all that stuff about democracy that Xinhua left out:

The US has signaled a major intensification of its campaign against President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) plan for a referendum seeking membership in the UN under the name "Taiwan," warning publicly for the first time that it sees the referendum as a move toward independence.

In an exclusive interview on Monday with the Hong Kong-based Phoenix TV, US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte called the proposed referendum a "mistake" and warned that it would be seen as violating Washington's policy against any attempt by Taiwan to alter the "status quo" with China.

"We oppose the notion of that kind of a referendum because we see that as a step toward a declaration of independence for Taiwan, towards the alteration of the status quo," Negroponte said.

"We believe it's important to avoid any kind of provocative steps on the part of Taiwan," Negroponte said.

The US State Department official's interview with Chinese media comes as Washington has come under increasing pressure on the issue from the Beijing administration, which considers the referendum to be what one leading US analyst described as a "referendum on independence in disguise."

The interview also comes three weeks before the opening of the UN General Assembly, at which several of Taiwan's allies are poised to introduce a resolution on Taiwan's membership in the world body.

China has also threatened to push for a UN resolution that would officially define Taiwan as part of China.

Such a resolution could harm efforts to break out of the international isolation Beijing has succeeded in imposing on Taiwan and could also force Washington to make a wrenching decision on whether to vote with China on the issue.

But it is not clear why the administration of US President George W. Bush decided to use a Chinese TV station as the medium through which to make its strongest and most extensive case against the referendum, though the US administration has generally rejected interviews with Taiwanese media.

In the Phoenix TV interview, Negroponte reiterated US friendship for Taiwan as well as Washington's strong support for Taiwan's democracy.

Asked whether it concerned him that Taiwan's democratic development was "sliding out of US hands," Negroponte said: "We feel that this is a time for the authorities in Taiwan to behave in a responsible manner, to behave in a way that would advance the interests of Taiwan while, at the same time, not disturbing the situation across the Taiwan Strait."

There's a certain discontinuity here, as A-gu pointed out a few posts ago. While the Chen Administration and US officials see the referendum as an independence move, the local populace here in Taiwan probably does not view it that way.

The State Department, for whatever reason -- be it to obtain China's cooperation on the North Korean situation, or because it genuinely fears the Chinese reaction -- is now bearing the cost of enforcement of China's demands -- or rather, the US-Taiwan relationship is bearing that cost. China's brilliant strategy of "being provoked" has enabled it, through adroit use of political theatre, to get the US State Department to enforce its demands on Taiwan. Ross Terrill has illustrated the problem quite nicely in The New Chinese Empire:

Why should the world's top power repeatedly recite, at Beijing's insistence, support for One China? We did not endorse the territorial integrity of the Soviet Union. On the contrary, we declined to accept the incorporation of Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia into Moscow's realm. The Soviet leaders lived with that. Why, in the case of China, a comparable Communist empire, do we endorse its questionable view of its own boundaries?

Countries friendly to Indonesia do not speak of One Indonesia, when questions arise about the rights of the turbulent provinces of Aceh and West Irian. No global tears are shed for Mongolia as a "divided country," yet it is one; should there be a doctrine of One Mongolia, to match One China? But China is special. China must be treated like a Ming vase, in Chris Patten's phrase. All this benefits the new Chinese empire. Beijing can pretend to be an aggrieved former semicolony, rather than the only multinational empire to survive into the twenty-first century.(p279-80)

Anyone perusing State Department reports from the 1960s knows that for forty years the US has been aware that if it pressed for the democratization of Taiwan, it was encouraging independence in the long run. One reason the KMT resisted, and resists, increased democratization is that it knowns that each step toward democracy is another step toward independence. Blaming Chen Shui-bian for the UN referendum drive is pointless -- the desire to enter the UN is a structural feature of Taiwan independence in the context of the world community of nations -- entering the UN is a signal that Taiwan is independent. Any independence-minded government would want to enter the UN, which is why entering the UN is supported by everyone within the DPP, and by those ideologues within the KMT who still dream ROC dreams. The US may also complain that Taiwan is engaging in this move at a time when it is otherwise busy in the Middle East and with the Korean situation, but that too is nonsense -- the US is always busy, somewhere.

China is engaging in political theatre. Note that despite its alleged displeasure, nothing concrete has happened to Taiwanese in China -- they are not being detained in large numbers, nor are visas and movement in and out being restricted, the underground banks that move money back and forth are not being closed down. Nor has China struck back against the US -- there are no "spontaneous" organized riots at US consulates, no expulsion of diplomats, no restrictions on US firms or trade. Once again, China's "being provoked" is taking place only in the media and it is incurring no real world costs to itself -- instead, thanks to the US State Department, it has transferred all those to the US-Taiwan relationship. Had UN Sec-Gen Ban not missed his cue and stupidly pronounced that UN 2578 meant that Taiwan was part of China, there would be no controversy at all, except, of course, in the media.

It should also be noted that it is unconscionable for the State Department to refer to a referendum as a violation of the Status Quo while ignoring China's moves to suppress Taiwan in the international sphere. It would be nice if State came out and said that China's missiles are a violation of the Status Quo, as is its repeated blocking of the island's entry into the WHO. Some balance would go a long way toward redressing the situation -- which has now, as Max Hirsch notes in the Kyodo News, impacting the Taiwan-Japan relationship as well.

The referendum isn't going away, and now everyone has adopted their respective theatrical postures, restricting the space for action. Note how successful the Chinese posture is: it merely expresses anger, and now Taipei and Washington are locked into opposing positions, while China retains its flexibility. It can advance or retreat as necessary, since someone else is enforcing its strictures. Brilliant.

Time for Washington to sit down with Taipei and find a wording on the referendum it can live with, and for Taipei to tone down the referendum rhetoric outside Taiwan. One way to signal a more reasonable posture while placating the home audience would be a show of inter-party unity -- making the annual resolution under a name acceptable to the KMT and to the US. But the situation urgently requires an introduction of flexibility before another idiot like Ban forgets his lines and does something stupid that will have real-world consequences.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [UN]