Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Abandoning Taiwan
Weekly Standard ^ | 12/3/03 | William Cristol & Gary Schmitt

Posted on 12/03/2003 10:59:29 AM PST by Paul Ross

Abandoning Taiwan
By William Kristol and Gary Schmitt
Weekly Standard | December 3, 2003


SENIOR BUSH ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS may be engineering a dramatic and dangerous shift in American policy toward Taiwan as a gift to the Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, who is visiting the United States next week. There are two elements of this proposed policy change, both of which favor Beijing at the expense of democratic Taiwan, and one of which may actually encourage Beijing to take military action against Taiwan. Both policy changes are being pushed by the staff of the National Security Council over the objections, we understand, of both the Departments of State and Defense.

First, according to numerous government sources, the senior director for Asian affairs at the National Security Council, James Moriarty, and Doug Paal, the de facto U.S. ambassador to Taiwan, are urging President Bush to declare, privately and perhaps publicly, that the United States opposes Taiwan's independence. This would be a significant change in America's so-called "One-China Policy," a change very much in Beijing's favor.

Until now, the American position on Taiwan's independence has been agnostic. American presidents have said they do not support independence but have also insisted that the cross-Strait issue be settled peacefully and by common agreement of the two sides. The point was that no solution should be imposed on either side. It was also to leave open the possibility that both sides might agree on independence, as indeed might occur were mainland China ever to become democratic (just as Moscow let go of Ukraine after the fall of communism in Russia). If the Bush administration changes its policy, it will place the United States in opposition to Taiwanese independence even under that scenario. Above all, however, if the administration makes this change, it will strike a severe blow against the vibrant Taiwanese democracy in a kow-tow to Beijing. After the president's recent stirring remarks in favor of democracy worldwide, this pcore principle in foreign policy.

Moriarty's second proposal is even more worrying. He proposes the United States declare that it will not defend Taiwan if Beijing launches a military attack on the island in response to a "provocation," i.e., some action or statement by Taiwan that Beijing determines moves in the direction of independence. This proposal, if adopted by the administration, could prove disastrous on several grounds. First of all, it would appear to run counter to the Taiwan Relations Act passed by Congress in 1979. Indeed, it may constitute an effort by the Bush administration in effect to repeal that law by executive fiat. The Act makes it U.S. policy that there should be a peaceful resolution of the dispute between China and Taiwan. But, by suggesting that there may be "legitimate" grounds for China to take offense, this new declaration would condone the very action the law intends to prevent. This would be all the more remarkable given that less than two years ago President Bush reaffirmed the American commitment to Taiwan by declaring that the United States would do "whatever it took" to defend Taiwan.

Second, this proposed policy shift would make war in the Strait more likely, not less. If the United States tells Beijing that it will not defend Taiwan in the event of a "provocation," this can only serve as an inducement to Beijing to threaten to use force, or perhaps actually to use force, on any occasion that Beijing deems Taiwan's behavior "provocative." After all, what constitutes a "provocation"? Beijing believes Taiwan's current status of de facto independence is already unacceptable.

Of course, the reason behind the latest maneuverings within the Bush administration is the recent decision by the present government of Taiwan to hold national referenda on a variety of issues this spring. Beijing fears that Taiwan may eventually decide to hold a referendum on subjects pertaining to independence. China has therefore denounced all referenda on any subject as "provocative." They have even warned darkly of possible "consequences" should Taiwan go ahead with the referenda. In addition, senior Chinese officials have repeatedly demanded that the Bush administration use American pressure to force Taiwan to abandon all referendum plans.

It appears that the Bush administration has at least partly caved to Beijing's pressure. Moriarty recently traveled to Taipei to deliver a stern warning against holding any referendum on any subject. Now he wants the administration to offer assurances to Premier Wen that the United States will indeed oppose referenda in Taiwan. This means, in turn, that the administration will effectively be agreeing with Beijing that such referenda constitute a "provocation." So what happens when Taiwan goes ahead and holds its referendum this spring, as it surely will?

We hope the Bush administration will pull back from this catastrophic change of course. The Clinton administration bent to China on the issue of Taiwan as well, but never as dangerously as senior Bush administration officials are now proposing. Nor so immorally. Taiwan is a thriving democracy. The Beijing government remains a tyranny. Will the Bush administration stifle democracy in Taiwan--actually demanding that it not hold popular votes -- to curry favor with the dictatorship?



TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alliance; china; gestures; pnac; taiwan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 next last
God, I sure hope this is a false alarm. The pledge to not provide military assistance to Taiwan does appear to eclipse even the brazen treason of Bill Clinton's parroting of the "THREE NO's" of PRC edicts.

If it is in fact what GWB does, (which I would never expect) ...God help us all.

1 posted on 12/03/2003 10:59:29 AM PST by Paul Ross
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: tallhappy; Black Jade; color_tear; belmont_mark; Alamo-Girl; Jeff Head; Travis McGee; ...
Ping.
2 posted on 12/03/2003 11:00:58 AM PST by Paul Ross (Reform Islam Now! -- Nuke Mecca!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
I think this piece was already posted.
3 posted on 12/03/2003 11:01:00 AM PST by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: generalissimoduane
Ping for Frank G. and Mr. H-.
4 posted on 12/03/2003 11:02:06 AM PST by BenLurkin (Socialism is Slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
We have pretty much sold out to the chinese commies anyway...this would only be the iceing on the cake imo...
5 posted on 12/03/2003 11:04:32 AM PST by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
Thanks for the ping!
6 posted on 12/03/2003 11:13:58 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
GW spends like a socialist, and he doesn't give a hoot about our economy; if he supports this then he is just an outright communist.

7 posted on 12/03/2003 11:15:28 AM PST by ARCADIA (Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
Well, those who hate the 'neos' should be happy at this disentanglement. :*(
8 posted on 12/03/2003 11:19:22 AM PST by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
I think this is a lot of smoke and mirrors. Every time someone makes a proposal does not mean the administration will act on it. There have been numerous reports out of the Pentagon about 'proposed solutions' that never see the light of day in the real world.

James F. Moriarty
Senior Director for Asian Affairs
National Security Council
James F. Moriarty was officially named Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Asian Affairs on April 19, 2002, after assuming the position of Acting Senior Director for Asian Affairs in January 2002. He began his career at the NSC in July 2001 as the Director for Asian Affairs.
Moriarty’s involvement in Asian affairs began when he served as Deputy Chief of the U.S. Embassy’s political section in Beijing, China. Later he served as the Chief of the General Affairs (Political) Section of the American Institute in Taiwan. He also has served at U.S. embassies in Morocco and Pakistan. In Washington, Mr. Moriarty has been the director of the Mozambique desk, a Nigeria analyst and deputy director of the Office of United Nations Political Affairs in the State’s Department.
A graduate of Dartmouth College and originally from Ware, Massachusetts, Moriarty entered the Foreign Service as a political officer in 1975. He has received two individual Superior Honor Awards (in 1993 and 2000) along with several other awards from the State Department.

hmmm ... Carter/Clinton devote' ?

From Taiwan news Aug 3 1999
....Despite Albright's cordial meeting in Singapore with Tang last week, tensions between Washington and Beijing persist.
China's Foreign Ministry today summoned the No. 2 U.S. diplomat in Beijing, James Moriarty, to protest proposed American weapons sales to Taiwan.

It looks as though during the dust ups in the mid to late 90's he was in Bejing. Stockholm syndrome by proxie?

9 posted on 12/03/2003 11:21:55 AM PST by BlueNgold (Feed the Tree .....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
I still believe that if China takes Taiwan, no other country will interfere.
10 posted on 12/03/2003 11:24:51 AM PST by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Consort
"I still believe that if China takes Taiwan, no other country will interfere."



Agreed. I think this is part of an under-the-table deal being made with the pinko Chinkos - "You can have Taiwan, as long as you don't interfere with our inevitable razing of North Korea"
11 posted on 12/03/2003 11:31:32 AM PST by Blzbba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Consort
I still believe that if China takes Taiwan, no other country will interfere.

It sounds like Poland all over again.
12 posted on 12/03/2003 11:33:05 AM PST by ARCADIA (Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba
If that's the case, we'd better hit N. Korea before China hits Taiwan. If they take out Taiwan first, all bets are off on N. Korea.

Never trust a commie.

For the record, I think this is all disinformation. Bush knows that the Chinese commies are our most dangerous enemies. Anything to keep them off balance is good.
13 posted on 12/03/2003 11:36:10 AM PST by Antoninus (In hoc signo, vinces †)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
In his earlier statements, Bush undid much of the damage clinton did on Taiwan. Give him credit for standing up to China so far.

I hope this is not true, or that Bush shrugs off these requests. It would be IMMENSELY POLITICALLY STUPID, aside from treacherous to an old ally and friend, for Bush to undermine Taiwan in this way.

China is accustomed to pushing as hard as it can on this issue and giving nothing in return. It would be a lot better if we stand firm now. Which is more dangerous, to stand up to China now with a strong warning that we will defend the freedom of Taiwan, or to come out with a weasel-worded statement that will encourage them to invade Taiwan?

A strong warning early in the game is a lot better than being put into the position of deciding whether or not to defend Taiwan after an invasion has already started, with China no doubt threatening to nuke our Pacific fleet. America has usually understood this principle very well. Whenever it has forgotten it, we have paid terrible penalties in blood and honor.
14 posted on 12/03/2003 11:57:42 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Consort
No other country but the U.S. could possibly interfere. Whether or not we would do so has never been spelled out. But if Bush agreed to such a deal, it would be a free invitation to China to invade. Incredibly stupid.
15 posted on 12/03/2003 11:59:41 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Well said. Bush has undone a lot of damage.

But if he lets these elements sway him, then he has made a big mistake.

16 posted on 12/03/2003 11:59:45 AM PST by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
I pray that this is just the ballooning of a pro ChiComm proposal by bad elements in the administration and that is gets shot down pronto.

I believe there is no way Bush would or will go for this.

If he does, then the eventual war we face will be orders of magnitude worse because we will have emboldened the beast just as Hitler was emboldened by the Rheinland, and Checkesolvakia before WW II.

17 posted on 12/03/2003 12:03:16 PM PST by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy; Cicero
I think the "One China Policy" (under Carter or Ford?) set it all up.
18 posted on 12/03/2003 12:06:40 PM PST by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Consort
The one One China theory dates back lots further than either of them...
19 posted on 12/03/2003 12:08:17 PM PST by maui_hawaii
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Consort
I don't have the link, but I read this morning that Russia said that it would not recognize an independent Taiwan. I'll try to get the link.
20 posted on 12/03/2003 12:11:30 PM PST by Spartano
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson