The Taiwan Haters Club

The State Department does an about-face, lending unexpected support to President Chen Shui-bian.

Members of the "Taiwan Haters Club" must be truly dismayed. When Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian formally announced the scrapping of the National Unification Council (NUC) on Monday, these supreme panda huggers were, with good reason, expecting the Taiwanese "troublemakers" to be lambasted by the Bush administration. After all, it is U.S. policy to maintain the uneasy status quo between Taiwan and mainland China. Instead, the State Department spokesman was seen as defending Taipei's move.

Speaking at a national security council conference on February 27, Chen concluded that the National Unification Council would "cease to function." To everyone's surprise, and contrary to widespread expectation, Adam Ereli, State's spokesman, responded that "the NUC has not been abolished; it has been frozen. . . . President Chen has stated that this does not alter the status quo and . . . he is committed to not take unilateral actions which would alter the status quo, all of which are positions that we have very strongly advocated and which have been reaffirmed." Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, also said the council has not been abolished and that Chen has reaffirmed his "commitment to cross-Strait peace and stability."

State wasn't this understanding when Taiwan's democratically elected president greeted the Year of the Dog on January 29 by floating the idea of abolishing the council, established by Taiwan's Kuomintang (KMT) government in 1990, and the council's guidelines, which called for a phased approach toward unification with China. State at that time issued a statement reiterating "The United States does not support Taiwan independence and opposes unilateral change to the status quo by either Taiwan or Beijing. We support dialogue in the interest of achieving a peaceful resolution of cross-Strait differences in a manner that is acceptable to the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait." Ereli characterized Chen's January 29 remarks as "inflammatory" and sending "the wrong signal." When asked at the daily press briefing whether the State Department had been caught by surprise, Ereli replied, "We certainly weren't expecting it, and we weren't consulted about it. So I'd say it was a surprise."

What raised one's eyebrow was that the criticism from Washington came even quicker than that from Beijing. In subsequent weeks, both Beijing and Washington pressured Taipei to halt. Rumors spread that President Bush was personally angry at Chen. Two envoys, Dennis Wilder, the National Security Council's acting senior director for Asian Affairs, and Clifford Hart, the Taiwan desk chief at State, were reported to have been dispatched last week to meet with Chen for six hours to tell him not to go ahead.

For suggesting the abolition of the NUC, Chen was accused by Beijing explicitly and Washington implicitly of breaking a promise known as the "Five No's"--a reference to his inaugural speech on May 20, 2000, in which Chen said: "I pledge that during my term in office, I will not declare independence, I will not change the national title, I will not push forth the inclusion of the so-called 'state-to-state' description in the Constitution, and I will not promote a referendum to change the status quo in regard to the question of independence or unification. Furthermore, there is no question of abolishing the Guidelines for National Unification and the National Unification Council."

On the surface, Chen does seem to have gone back on his word. However, whenever critics bring up the "Five No's," a crucial precondition is always conveniently ignored. Before the pledges in the speech, in the previous sentence, Chen had added this qualification: "As long as the CCP regime has no intention to use military force against Taiwan." The reality is that China's intimidation campaign has been on the increase. At last count, Beijing had more than 800 missiles pointed at Taiwan.

The National Unification Council and its Guidelines were products of a bygone era when the KMT, Taiwan's former ruling party, still upheld the myth that the Republic of China was the legitimate government of all China. At a time when the KMT was indistinguishable from the state, its party platform automatically became state doctrine. Sixteen years later, with Taiwan's pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party having twice won presidential elections, the NUC and its Guidelines are being sent back to where they belong--as planks in the opposition KMT's party platform and not government policy.

Contrary to what the critics see as an alteration to the status quo, the scrapping of the Council and the Guidelines doesn't change anything. For one thing, the NUC has largely been defunct since 2000 when Chen was first elected president. Removing the NUC and its Guidelines does not prevent the people of Taiwan from pursuing the ultimate goal of reuniting with China if they choose. Chen correctly said, "As long as the principle of democracy is honored and the free will to choose by Taiwan's 23 million people is respected, we will not exclude any possible form of future development of cross-strait relations. We are, however, adamant that no one set preconditions or give an ultimate goal regarding the people's right to choose."

What made the State Department see the light? One key factor was that Taipei listened to Washington and toned down its vocabulary. Instead of saying the NUC was "abolished," it's now said that it "ceases to function." By adopting a less provocative term, Taipei enabled Washington to publicly claim that there's no change to the status quo. Washington's intended audience, undoubtedly, is Beijing. Since the status quo remains unchanged, Washington basically is telling Beijing not to make any fuss over the episode.

Taiwan haters were hoping President Bush would issue stern warnings to Taiwan not to change the status quo, as he did in front of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabo at the White House in December 2003, when he receives Chinese Communist Party chief Hu Jintao in April. State, for once, has shown some common sense and, standing with Taiwan, has ruined the Taiwan haters' day.

This whole Taiwan garbage has confused, and ticked me off for years. I don't understand why we pledge to defend Taiwan, yet we don't want them to declare independence, when everyone with a pulse knows Taiwan is an independant state.
We need to China to go pack sand when it come to Taiwan. Taiwan has done some amazing things with their economy, they are a stable representative democracy, and have been good friends to the US. I'm also sure the people of Taiwan do not want Comminust rule after nearly 60 years of prosperity and self determination. The US needs to sack up, quit the double talk, and recognize Taiwan as an independant nation!

Ditto. Free and democratic peoples should not have to put up with any crap from a thugocracy like the PRC.

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.