Chris Nelson's latest missive straight from the Beijing-dominated heart of the Washington Establishment (my comments in brackets):+++++++++++
TAIWAN...we've noted in many Reports that while the US has tried for years to encourage a more productive Cross-Strait dialogue, in hopes of reducing tensions between China and Taiwan, there is a built-in potential contradiction.
That is, as much as the US supports the people of Taiwan and their right to international space, as a practicing democracy, the US recognizes that the bedrock of its relations with China requires agreement with the "one China" principle as it regards "Taiwan independence". [MT -- the US position is actually that Taiwan's status is undetermined. It weasels its way between that position and kowtowing to China.]
Veritable East China Seas' of ink have been spilled parsing the fine points of legal, diplomatic and alternative universe definitions which allow Washington, Taipei and Beijing to...if not keep the peace, exactly...avoid the disaster of war.
Now, after eight years of sometimes high tension because the US supported Taiwan's democracy, but not always the independence-minded goals and actions of Taiwan's democratically elected DPP government, the newly-elected KMT government is moving rapidly to consolidate a more cooperative working relationship with Beijing.[MT -- this paragraph is just plain silly, and it is silly in a terrifying way. In the first sentence note that the "tension" is cause by -- yes! -- US support for a democracy. The Washington Establishment has now completely absorbed Beijing's point of view, under which "democracy" creates tension. The reality is, as everyone knows, is that the Straits are tense because China has threatened to maim and murder Taiwanese in order to annex their island, and to kill anyone who gets in its way. Tension is caused by threats to democracy, not support of it. Yet Nelson here identifies the US with the cause of the problem!]
There are observers from the DPP side of the debate who don't like much of what they think is going on, either openly, or behind the curtain...and you have to ask how much of their concerns will start to be echoed by some US supporters of Taiwan, either now, or next year:
The basic problem is seen as Hu and Ma's priorities now being reversed, with Ma under far more pressure to deliver on his campaign promises because he lives in a democracy...people do "throw the bums" out when they don't deliver, especially on economic issues.[MT -- maybe somewhere else, but not here -- we are in our 60th year of KMT control of the legislature, and so far the public has given two previous presidents both their terms. It is fascinating how often people repeat the mantra of "Taiwanese will change their leaders!" without ever looking to see if they have actually done that before.]
Per the "one China, two governments' idea, one key to viewing all this is the Ma Administration's willingness to fudge the meaning of the so-called "1992 consensus." Su Chi and Ma's formulation has always been "One china with different interpretations."
The Chinese never say "different interpretations" because, fundamentally, this means two Chinas - one PRC and one ROC. Both Hu and Ma talk about "shelving differences" in order to go forward, and there is much support for that view in Washington.
Perhaps, DPP advocates argue. It has meant that negotiations have gone forward swiftly and, apparently, smoothly. But friends in the DPP worry that the Chinese hold on their one China principle - that sovereignty is not possible to divide up- means that the Ma folks are involved in a game of Go in which Taiwan is already surrounded even if they don't see it yet. [MT -- this is too charitable a view of KMT plans, though I suppose Chris cannot -- yet -- openly suggest that the KMT plans to sell out Taiwan.]
One obvious area of conflict...right now...between the traditional Taiwan lobby here and both the new KMT government, and the Bush Administration, is arms sales.
If the whole goal of the Bush Administration has been to lower tensions and hope for improved dialogue Cross Strait, and if those goals are now being actively pursued by both sides...why is the US-Taiwan Business Council, led by former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, loudly demanding that a large US arms sale package be announced for the island?[MT -- duh! Because we need new weapons here. Not selling weapons to Taiwan will only serve China's interests, not ours.]
Either McCain or Obama will likely face an increasingly complex, possibly very contradictory "Taiwan lobby" next year.
++++++++++++
In reality, the "area of conflict" is not between the "Taiwan lobby" and the KMT government, but lies deep within US policy, which seeks to be all things to all men. The various pro- and anti-Taiwan positions simply reflect the fundamental contradictions in US policy. No doubt, though, when things get screwed up as they inevitably will, the "Taiwan Lobby" will take the blame. Because the realpoliticians who craft US policy save admissions of error for their memoirs......
[Taiwan]
12 comments:
If by "Taiwan lobby" you mean the "Taiwan Independence Lobby", then the area of conflict is not between the "Taiwan Independence Lobby" and the KMT government, the conflict is between the between the "Taiwan Independence Lobby" and current Taiwanese popular opinion.
During the DPP years, the Taiwan Independence Lobby could make a straight faced argument to Americans that they represent the 23 million citizens of Taiwan (actually DPP only gained power due to a divided KMT) but it is unlikely the US and the world will continue to buy that charade with a KMT government in Taiwan.
My prediction is that the Taiwan Independence Lobby will suffer the same fate as its predecessor the "Free China Lobby" which faded away because of changes in Taiwanese popular opinion. Note that the old Free China Lobby had far more influence over the US government and American officialdom so if the Free China Lobby could not maintain its influence the last time there was a political shift in Taiwan, I can't imagine the Taiwan Independence Lobby faring any better now.
Winston, the change in Taiwanese popular opinion is toward the development of a deeper Taiwan identity.
I think it would be better to say that the influence of the Taiwan lobby might fade away because at present Beijing has acquired such complete moral dominance over US Taiwan policy.
Michael
Winston,
Most Independent surveys confirm Taiwanese public opinion is by-and-large congruent with the "Taiwan Independence Lobby"'s positions. This is not a trend, but a long term phenomenon, independent of political fortunes. This is routinely confirmed time and time again beginning with polling from the early 90's.
During the Chen administration the US Congress had no fewer that four different and often conflicting voices in regard to the interests of the Taiwanese; DPP (Chen Administration), KMT (blues), FAPA, and the CCP Taiwan Affairs Council.
.
.
.
Now, after eight years of sometimes high tension because the US supported Taiwan's democracy...
Jeezus! The 3 branches of U.S. government don't even support democracy in their own country. Indeed, they have shown much contempt for it in the past 8 years. Not to mention, the current system itself is certainly not conducive to this "d" word. And the sad thing is no one wants to do anything about it.
A lot of the text from this article is from an alternative universe, as usual. Too bad for Taiwan, and too bad for the rest of the world.
R.I.P. George Carlin, by the way. Now THIS was an American who told the world the truth about his country.
.
.
.
I read something in the SCMP today that bodes ill for those in the dreamyworld where Ma's policies will usher in a more peaceful era. I have written the key points in here because of the SCMP paywall.
Title: "Setback for Taiwanese hopes on WTO entry"
Journalist: The infamous and always biased Lawrence Chung
"A top mainland official in charge of Taiwanese affairs has reportedly ruled out the island joining the World Health Organisation, prompting concern from Taipei, which had hoped for Beijing's blessing.
"In a meeting with Japanese legislators on Monday in Beijing, Wang Yi, director of the Taiwan Affairs Office under the State Council, said the mainland would continue to object to the island's bid to join the global health body....
"His remarks raised concern in Taiwan, especially since the two sides had resumed dialogue in a landmark meeting this month to improve ties and shelve political differences."
Here is is, people. No matter what Ma or the KMT do, there will be no budging from Beijing. This means that the KMT government will not get the concessions it had hoped for. And the more they pull names like Chinese Taipei out of their rear ends, the less good it will do.
Therefore, the current government is actually vulnerable in the medium term, unless their economic measures deliver the result they promised. Ma is a backlash for Chen. He does not signal a new direction in the thinking of the Taiwanese.
Winston, this is where the "Independence Lobby" still has a lot of steam left, despite setbacks. Michael noted that Taiwan is trending towards a deepening Taiwan identity. Polls have shown this many times.
In order to reverse this trend, the Chinese side must be liked by a lot of Taiwanese. That is how idenities change in the absence of strong-arming -- through soft power.
If Ma cannot fulfill his promises AND the Taiwanese public perceives a continued lack of flexibility from Beijing, he will not necessarily be voted out of office. However, there will be even less incentive to identify with China. Ma will go through four to eight years with egg on his face. While the KMT could still find a way to dupe the public into believing their economic plans were helping (not likely in the next two years since growth in China and the US is slowing, so Taiwan will slow slightly too), I don't perceive any threat to "identity" if the Chinese side is inflexible.
DPP politicians, with proper party management, can probably, slowly regain some ground.
The risk is entirely from the military imbalance and the threat of coercion, which the US is doing nothing to stem. In fact, the scary thing is that pieces like this one show that many believe that unification against the wishes of the Taiwanese public is a desired consequence.
When the independence of Kosovo was declared, we all heard a lot of hoo ha about how the majority of Kosovars wanted independence from Serbia. Isn't it interesting how the self-determination of the Kosovars is more important than the self-determination of the Taiwanese. I wonder how many Taiwanese it takes to equal one Kosovar. Is it a 2:1 ratio or more?
I apologize for being imprecise in my pontifications. I don't and I don’t think anyone else disputes that the current trend has been Taiwanese developing a deeper sense of Taiwanese identity.
What I meant to say is that public opinion in Taiwan is shifting away from seeing de jure independence as conducive to Taiwan's long term security and prosperity, which is what the American Taiwan Independence Lobby explicitly advocates.
However, there is a segment of Taiwanese society that seems to be defying the trend towards greater Taiwanese identity. For example, way back in 1997, I spent the day with the faculty and cadets of Taiwan's political warfare college as a guest of the MOD and it was a total blast to the cold war past. Walls were lined with anti-Communist slogans, displays about famous Chinese civil war battles, and memorials to "martyrs" who died fighting the evil Japanese imperialists. Surprisingly, the faculty and students not shy about their disagreement with the "special state to state relations" even though technically they shouldn't have been bad mouthing their President. Even if the Taiwan Independence Lobby obtained a commitment from the US to intervene in a cross strait conflict, Taiwan's military must be committed enough to the cause of Taiwan independence to fight long enough for the US to arrive. I just don't think the Taiwan military's heart is in such an independence war.
I also saw a recent poll which showed well over 70% of Taiwanese willing to fight to defend Taiwan from a Chinese attack. I have reason to feel these numbers are fairly accurate when, following the 2004 elections, I was made aware that loose networks of Taiwanese were awaiting orders to take up arms against any coup attempt or Chinese invasion.
Note: Taiwan Lobby relates to all groups lobbying for their interests in the US government and is not a partisan term for FAPA.
The numbers of Taiwanese rejecting eventual unification have also risen since the early 90's, ranging in percentile from the high 70% to the low 80%. When the threat of war is removed from the equation, the results are enormously in favor of dejure independence. So the FAPA and DPP branches of the "Taiwan lobby" are not entirely off base. The KMT and CCP branches of the "Taiwan Lobby" may be trying to represent ideologies which are incongruent with mainstream public opinion.
Winston, you are also referring to something that happened over 10 years ago in a military school. Everyone knows that the military is one of the bluest institutions in Taiwan.
Would they fight for Taiwanese independence? I don't think that is the issue. If you look at it from a Cold War-era mentality, they would be fighting to maintain the ROC.
Haha, Winston, Winston, Winston. It's too bad you have no idea how much Chen Shui-Bian and the DPP has changed Taiwan. 1997? Try 2007. Regardless of how he fared in his second term, there is absolutely no doubt that people in Taiwan more and more are unified behind a Taiwanese identity and not a Taiwanese one.
Remember that these 10 years is also one in which hundreds of thousands of Taiwanese actually have gone to work and invest in China, lived long term there, and come back feeling more Taiwanese than ever.
Winston, look up how much people love Wang Chien-Ming. Do you know why the love him so much? He's the native son of Taiwanese identity. He plays the national past time. He's the shy boy from Tainan that throws a wicked ass sinker. He's tall and handsome and he "looks" Taiwanese. He's gone to the US and kicked the butts of the mighty, rich, white & black Americans. Blue and Green alike love this guy to death.
There are a lot of things in play here in the Taiwanese imagination. Some of those things aren't politically correct or accurate. But if you sum it up the overall picture is a very resilient and strong and growing Taiwanese identity.
anon 12:32,
I'd have to disagree that Chen Shui Bian was responsible for the change, but rather his presidency was a reflection of the publics desire to express themselves. They saw in A bian's campaigns the themes which resonated with them and a person who could facilitate those desire into action.
Now, before a "blue" logician comes forward to point out the narrow margin of victory in both Chen's elections, it needs to be pointed out that the KMT's strength does not come from their supporters belief in a shared, standard national idiom. The KMT has 60 years of patronage to draw from and many KMT supporters do not support the old "one Chinese" line, but instead, they support a very strong Taiwanese national identity.
"and many KMT supporters do not support the old "one Chinese" line, but instead, they support a very strong Taiwanese national identity."
Which is why I hope Tsai can remake the DPP. I think that a Taiwan-focused party that had its feet firmly on the ground would resonate strongly in Taiwan.
Man, there are a lot of really interesting things mentioned in the comments here. It would've been great if people gave some links to all the studies and statistics they saw, especially the one where 70% of Taiwanese were willing to fight to defend Taiwan from China....
Oh well.
Post a Comment