Feinstein insists U.S. not bound to protect Taiwan

Mercury News ^ | 4/20/06 | K. Oanh Ha

[NormsRevenge]

In remarks certain to please visiting Chinese President Hu Jintao, U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein on Thursday told a gathering of Chinese-American business and cultural leaders in San Francisco that the United States has no obligation to defend Taiwan if it provokes China into a military confrontation.

Feinstein's comments came on a day when Hu and President Bush sat down together in Washington to discuss a range of issues -- including Taiwan, which China regards as the No. 1 issue in U.S.-China relations. Before his first U.S. visit this week, Hu urged Taiwanese leaders to resume talks with China and called actions toward independence a threat to the region.

``It is important to point out a common misconception -- nowhere does the TRA explicitly require the U.S. to go to war with the mainland over Taiwan,'' Feinstein said, referring to the Taiwan Relations Act, at the annual conference of the Committee of 100 in San Francisco. The group helps foster U.S.-China relations.

The act, passed by the U.S. Congress in 1979, is the foundation of U.S.-Taiwan relations. Some supporters of Taiwan assume the United States is legally bound to defend the island, but the United States' obligation to Taiwan has increasingly become a point of contention as Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian has promoted Taiwan independence. His provocations have irked the Bush administration and caused tensions in U.S.-Taiwan relations.

China claims Taiwan as part of its territory. Since 1979, the United States has acknowledged China's ``one-China'' policy and recognizes Beijing as the legitimate government of all China.

Feinstein isn't the first U.S. official to assert that the United States isn't legally bound to defend Taiwan, but her comments are certain to cause ripples. Bush had pledged in 2001 that the ``U.S. will do whatever it takes to defend Taiwan.''

[unseen]

And what would you defend. What would you lay your life down for? If China attacked Taiwan I would volunteer for the army. I would welcome a tax hike to provide our men and women the best our country could give them. Because if we do nothing then China becomes the supreme ruler in Asia. Japan will rearm and you must remember what happened when that occurred 60 years ago. Unlike globalists who believe there is no difference between governments and that it is all about money, I believe that there are difference in governments and communism is not the government for me.

[unseen]

Yes our paid for government has no backbone anymore. It has no moral compass and it fails to see farther in the future then next election. Maybe we should outsource our leadership, just think the new leaders could be bribed for 1/10th of the price it takes to bribe a congressman nowadays. Think how much companies could save. The profit would increase the share price of every company in America. No more million dollar loop holes put into our laws. they could buy off an Indian congressman for 100,000 dollars.

[KoRn]

"Maybe we should outsource our leadership"

That's one hell of an idea! Lets get some leaders that will do the jobs that OUR leaders just won't do.

[rmlew]

We are the last government still in existence to administer the territory, unless you consider Taiwan to be independent.

[unseen]

Taiwan is the last stronghold of China's democracy. It was the place the Chinese government fled to when the RED Chinese rebels conquered mainland China. At that time Red China did not have a large navy and could not hope to mount a successful attack on that stronghold. Back in the 1950's we actually valued Democracies over Communist regimes so we pledged to defend Taiwan from RED China. We did this with our navy and we did this by selling arms to them. We did not even recognized RED China as the legitimate government of China until the crook Nixon went there in 1970's. In the last 30 years our leaders have hoped that economic incentives and increased trade relations with China would change the government of Red China to a more democratic form of government. Our leaders have been wrong. Now China is strong enough to take Taiwan by force if they want to but are still worried about the USA and world reaction. 30 years from now I see the Communist revolution of China being complete and one Super China will emerge with over 2 billion people who will look at the USA as we look at Britain today. We will not be able to project power into the pacific and China will have defacto control
of half the world from the Persian gulf to the Hawian islands and economic control of 3/4ths of the world.

[HostileTerritory]

When did the United States adminster the territory of Taiwain?

[unseen]

never never never.

Japan ruled it until the end of WW2. After that ww2 China tool control of the country. The civil war in China caused the nationalist to flee to Taiwan As its last stronghold. It was never a US province, territory or anything. It has always been a friend since ww2. Red China on the other hand fought us to a bloody standstill in Korea 50 years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Taiwan#Japanese_Rule

[Doe Eyes]

If China attacked Taiwan I would volunteer for the army. I would welcome a tax hike to provide our men and women the best our country could give them.

Just out of curiosity. We are at war right now. Did you volunteer for the army? Are you asking for a tax hike to provide for our men and women in Iraq?

[unseen]

Iraq and Taiwan are two different wars. A war with China would required the entire nation to sacrifice for the survival of our nation. Iraq is not a world power and does not require the same level of sacrifice. Iraq and Taiwan have Two different policy's. Taiwan is protected under treaty, they have been a friend for 55 years. They have supported the US in that region of the world. Iraq on the other hand was an enemy to the USA. We are and were capable of defeating them with a small force. True, we should have sent more troops but that was a policy decision not a lack of forces decision. Also the Iraq war can and should be paid for with the 2.4 trillion in taxes the governments collects. If our leaders stood up and said we need more taxes to pay for this war then yes I would not have a problem with paying more taxes to ensure a victory. However, I would hope that the elected leaders would cut the fat first before requesting more funds.

It seems like you have no idea that all wars are different and are fought for different circumstances. Now the question is would you fight for this country or pay more in taxes to your country for any reason?

[Doe Eyes]

Now the question is would you fight for this country or pay more in taxes to your country for any reason?

Certainly. I'm a little past fighting age, but I did support our war effort in theater as a civilian defense contractor.

[claudiustg]

I'm in favor of dropping Feinstein on China.

[Zack Nguyen]

If we will not defend a free market democracy being swallowed by a Communist state, then I don't recognize my own country. For Senator Feinstein to start the ball rolling in that direction is shameful.

Note: Despite my screen name I am not Asian.

[Zack Nguyen]

Perhaps we are not obligated by treaty, but we are obligated morally. They are a democracy and China is Communist. As long as Taiwan is willing to fight we should fight with them.

[cryptomc]

>>(3) to make clear that the United States decision to establish diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China rests upon the expectation that the future of Taiwan will be determined by peaceful means;

That is a key part of the TRA. When the Chicoms passed that law last year declaring they will retake the island by force if necessary, they in effect violated the terms of the TRA and therefore, our diplomatic relations with the PRC should be severed. However, I wouldn't hold my breath on it.

[Cincinna]

Leave our friends and closest allies dangling in the wind. Great foreign policy, Dianne. What next after you abandon Taiwan? Israel?

[gondramB]

"That is a key part of the TRA. When the Chicoms passed that law last year declaring they will retake the island by force if necessary, they in effect violated the terms of the TRA and therefore, our diplomatic relations with the PRC should be severed. However, I wouldn't hold my breath on it."

That is a key aprt but I don't remember the Chinese statement that way - i remember them saying they would prevent Taiwan from declaring independence by force. As for breaking relations the way I read that is that it would require more than just words -China would have to "do something."

[FerdieMurphy]

The zookeepers haven't realized she's a waterbuffalo and belongs in a cage with the hildebeeste.

[FerdieMurphy]

What are you willing to do?

What is our goobermint willing to do? There are enough politicos in our goobermint to staff the entire Army!

Then we have a marvelous congress that works overtime so that we'll have to work more overtime.

Bring on the revolution!

Get rid of both parties!

[FerdieMurphy]

Me too. Taiwan is our friend.

[Czar]

"Soon to be re-elected Empress Senator DiChiFi has spoken,...

And very aptly named, DiChiFi is indeed. If I recall correctly, her husband has very valuable business interests in China and/or involving China. His wife, DiChiFi, has always had a very legislative-friendly attitude on anything involving China. Moreover, and I may not be entirely correct about this, I cannot recall her ever recusing herself from any Senate votes on legislation impacting business in China.

Of course, the ChiPanda-ing is not limited to DiChiFi. It was not all that long ago that our rubber spined Speaker, Denny "I Love Compromises" Hastert, appointed one Nancy Dorn--a controversial Red China lobbyist--to a very senior position on his staff. As far as I know, she's still there.

Congress continues to give American citizens very little reason to trust them or the federal government.