The media are reporting a strange emanation from the US Defense Department, whose internal contradictions are a delight to behold. Wish I could get my hands on the entire document, but it doesn't seem to be on the DoD news site. Apparently a delegation headed by DoD chief Robert Gates is in Beijing, and said stuff that will require much "clarification"... CNA describes:Taiwan's representative office in Washington has been asked to approach the U.S. Department of Defense for clarification of a statement released by Pentagon officials in Beijing Sunday that likened a U.N. bid referendum to be held in Taiwan next year to an "independence referendum, " Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) officials said Monday.
Officials from the representative office in Washington have been asked to contact the Pentagon to find out why the U.S. military authorities issued a news release in Beijing in which they labeled the U.N. bid referendum proposed by the Democratic Progressive Party administration to seek Taiwan's entry into the U.N. under the name Taiwan as an "independence referendum" and why they flatly proclaimed that President George W. Bush is opposed to independence of that "island nation" referring to Taiwan, said MOFA deputy spokeswoman Yeh Fei-pi.
Yeh pointed out that no U.S. administration agency has ever used terms like "independence referendum" and "island nation" to refer to Taiwan during communications with Taiwan.
Another article adds:
'The Foreign Ministry has taken note of such a statement and has asked its representative office in the US to approach Pentagon for clarification and ask it why was such a misunderstanding,' said Phoebe Yeh, acting spokeswoman of the ministry.
She was referring to a press statement released by Pentagon on a two-day Beijing visit from Sunday by US Defense Secretary Robert Gates, during which the Defense Department said the Gate's delegation 'expects the Chinese to bring up Taiwan - especially with the independence referendum on the ballot soon.'
LOL. "the island nation" rubs shoulders with "independence referendum."
[Taiwan] [media] [US] [China]
16 comments:
Hmm...I certainly see a problem with "independence referendum" but what is the problem with being called "an island nation"? Isn't that what Taiwan is?
Taiwan is not an "island nation", but a province of China. It is part of the Chinese nation. Beijing should strongly object and protest this label by the DoD.
Thank you for the Beijing line, zyzyx. I wish I could say you added something constructive to the conversation.
You know, you would think the military of all organizations would try to handle the matter with more care. By branding the UN referendum as an independence referendum, aren't they kind of giving the go-ahead for China to use the referendum as an excuse to invoke (even if they won't act on in this case) the anti-secession law? And if the Chinese did indeed want to act on that law (although they won't) wouldn't the US military potentially be the ones saddled with the prospect of fighting the Chinese (although Bush is more and more leading me to believe he would let the Taiwanese hang)? I guess you don't have to be intelligent to be in the military after all.
Sorry. By "military" please read DoD. And Adam, no it is not an independence referendum. It is a referendum on UN membership. The island is independant, and has been since 1895, whether it is/was called the RoC or Taiwan.
I find it annoying that Chinese Communist sympathisers take English words and twist and turn them until they take on a new meaning completely divorced from their true English meaning.
I would appreciate it if English words were used in a rational objective manner and not a warped Communist Chinglish manipualtion.
Firstly a province is a geographical region governed as part of a greater geographical entity. As of this moment Taiwan is completely self governing so it makes no sense to refer to it as a province of China. All matters concerning the on the ground governing of Taiwan are made in Taipei not Beijing.
Secoundly the concept of a nation is a somewhat abstract concept whereby a group of people identify with and share a sense of common culture, history and heritage. Taiwan is increasingly meeting this definition as indicated by an increase in the number of people residing on Taiwan identifying with the concept of being Taiwanese. In addition the development of a free media as well as increasing freedom of speech, assembly and media is becoming an increasingly saliant point of differentiation between Taiwan and the P.R.C.
In short please use English in a rational objective manner not idealistic dogma.
I don't know which "China" you're referring to, but Beijing administers the People's Republic of China and so far has exerted no direct authority over Taiwan since it assumed power in 1949. Meanwhile, the ROC government continues its administration over Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu.
There's no evidence to suggest that the PRC has exercised sovereignty over Taiwan. That's the reality today and totally unrelated to the current political turmoil.
Adam asked:
- - -
... what is the problem with being called "an island nation"?
- - -
The "problem" is that being an "island nation" contradicts the "independence referendum" claim. The latter term is the problem.
The PRC flag has never flown over Taiwan; therefore, Taiwan is already independent. That independence merely needs to be recognized, but that recognition is constantly blocked by our belligerent neighbor.
Tim Maddog
Thomas said:
"The island is independant, and has been since 1895, whether it is/was called the RoC or Taiwan."
Thomas, since when has being under Japanese rule, having your women taken as sex slaves for the Japanese army and your men conscripted to die in WWII counted as being "independent"?
Mark, you shouldn't be confused by Taiwan-friendly Thomas. The framing is usually about Taiwan being independent "from China." It's not too hard to see that's what he meant.
Channing forayed, as usual, into the land of absurdity:
- - -
There's no evidence to suggest that the PRC has exercised sovereignty over Taiwan. That's the reality today and totally unrelated to the current political turmoil.
- - -
The reason "[t]here's no evidence" is simple: it never happened. Channing's description of it being "totally unrelated to the current political turmoil," however, is laughable. The PRC is the biggest reason, for example, that Taiwan isn't a member of the United Nations.
Tim Maddog
"Mark, you shouldn't be confused by Taiwan-friendly Thomas."
Thank you, Tim. Sorry. I was not implying that Taiwan became an independent country in 1895. My remark should only be viewed in the context of zyzyx's previous comment that it is still a part of China....
I'm using technicalities to prove a point that the PRC doesn't currently administer Taiwan (a fact that dates to its founding in 1949), which is unrelated to the political tension in 2007.
And I would love to separate my concrete, absurd facts from your allegedly reasonable personal attacks. It's clear that I don't even need to go into my personal opinions without finding deep-green gas pumped down my throat. The gas is already having a problem with historical facts.
Ok, in the Taipei Times today it says in reference to this subject:
---
...The next day, another Garamone article said the US was "against independence for the island nation."
...While US officials have long said they "do not support" Taiwan's independence, they have never publicly said they "oppose" or "are against" it.
---
So it looks like the problem with that statement wasn't that Taiwan was an "island nation" but that the US was "against independence" (as opposed to not supporting it). Got it now!
Why can't Channing tell the difference between attacking a person's arguments and attacking the person?
Tim Maddog
I can't explain because I would simply foray, as usual, into the land of absurdity.
Japan lost so a lot of the atrocities they committed get highlighted.
Conscription occurred in Japan, Taiwan, and... the U.S.!!! So if I were a pacifist in the U.S., I'd probably still be conscripted to die as well.
Not to say the Japanese were right, but they were trying to show that they learned all that stuff about nation-state and colonial powers from... U.K., Germany, and the European powers. They learned the game and started playing it themselves.
I would also like to point out the racism that Western powers exercised in their war against Japan (as compared to their war against Germany). Even World War II wasn't total war. There were rules about fair play and you could have things like prisoner exchanges. However, these often didn't apply to Japan. For example, Australia thought absolutely nothing of torpedoing Japanese hospital ships. The idea was that they were just 'Asian devils' not just enemies.
Taiwan belongs to China, period. China has over 160 Countries backing them up including others in the 5 Permanent UN members with Veto-wielding power. Taiwan has only what? At least 20 some countries recognize them as a state or sovereign country? Sad to say that those countries are only a small developing countries. Taiwan should be banned from all organization and those so called 23 million peoples doesn't even really care about Chen so called referendum. How about China 1.6 Billion people? Now that counts more then anything. If Taiwan insist on using numbers of people then consider the bigger number. According to the report only about 200,000 people march that day on the Taiwan Referendum entry to the UN. Sadly to was rejected and they all side with the 1.6 Billion people that opposed. Taiwan should just shut its mouth up and bow down to their superior instead of trying to fight a battle or even maybe a WAR that they will never win.
Post a Comment