Posted on 10/26/2002 12:37:58 AM PDT by tallhappy
CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush said on Friday the United States would use its influence to ensure China and Taiwan settle their differences peacefully and promised to make it clear to Taipei that Washington does not support independence.
In a news conference with Chinese President Jiang Zemin, Bush said the United States stood by the "one China" policy, which acknowledges that Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of China.
"The 'one China' policy means that the issue ought to be resolved peacefully," Bush said.
"We've got influence with some in the region. We intend to make sure that the issue is resolved peacefully, and that includes making it clear that we do not support independence," Bush added.
Taiwan's president, Chen Shui-bian, has voiced support for a referendum on formal independence from China.
The move outraged Beijing, which views the island as a renegade province and a linchpin in Sino-U.S. relations.
Beijing had hoped Bush would repeat a pledge not to back independence for Taiwan, which China says must eventually be reunified with the mainland, by force if necessary.
Nationalists headed by Chiang Kai-shek fled to Taiwan in 1949 after losing a civil war to Mao Zedong's communists. Washington shifted diplomatic recognition to Beijing in 1979.
But the United States has offered Taiwan the biggest arms package in a decade and Bush has pledged to do "whatever it takes" to help the democratically governed island protect itself.
Bush did not repeat that pledge at Friday's news conference.
But during a visit to China earlier this year, he said, "When my country makes an agreement, we stick with it, and there is (something) called the Taiwan Relations Act and I honour that act, which says we will help Taiwan defend herself if provoked."
China says it is seriously concerned about the U.S. warming to Taiwan under Bush and has called on Washington to halt military contacts and arms sales to the island.
Are you saying Bush has specifically stated at some time in the past that he supports a Taiwanese fight for independence? If he has, I have never heard it. Please provide a source.
It would not be in the security interests of the United States to blatantly inject ourselves into the political nuts and bolts of the resolution of that dispute, which is what a declaration of independence for Taiwan by us would do. We have pledged to help Taiwan should the Chinese attack. That's as far as our committment should go.
That's obvious (sorry cheap shot).
Your comments are decades out of date. They do hark back to the time when Taiwan was still under Marshall law after being taken over by China after WWII (Taiwan was part of Japan from 1895 til the end of WWII).
It was illegal for people of Taiwan to say anything other than what you express and those who did were imprisoned, exiled or killed.
There was no representative democracy at the time nor free press either.
In the last 10 years or so Taiwan has become fully free with multiparty democracy.
The vast majority favor either outright independence -- ie changing the name of the nation from Republic of China to Republic of Taiwan or maintaining the status quo which is continued independence from China as the Republic of China.
As far as seeing themseves as a government in exile, that became rather silly after 10 years of existence of Red China, but continued on as an empty policy while Chiang Kai-shek and his son Chiang Ching-kuo were alive.
A few years after the younger Chiang died in 1988, the constitution was changed to correct the anachronistic position -- no more claim to be the legitimite government of China etc...
Tancredo for President 2004!
Was it the smart people that also made Communist China a nuclear power in the first place?
So therefore Bush would make a statement directly opposite of this?
Quite a complex strategy.
You don't know what you are talking about. I suggest you study the issue before declaring that Bush is "shaft[ing]" Taiwan.
Now you say what Bush said then is not true and he needs China's permission to go in to Iraq.
For one thing, I supported and cheered the strength and fortitude of President when he made his UN speech and statements associated with it.
Now you say he was not telling the truth.
And, China is not going to support us on Iraq.
Taiwan's President offered any and all help after 911.
The USA chooses not to use Taiwan's air bases or ports, but could.
If the US did use one of Taiwan's ports or bases (as we did for decades before 1979) the Chinese communists would get mad at us.
Somehow, I don't think the leaders and people of Taiwan are paralyzed with angst right now. That affliction is for the con men around this joint.
Two reasons why you say this that I can muster up.
1) Is the way I said what I said. Which is usaully the defense somefolks use when trying to discredit what it was I did say.
2) I have never been an advocate for Nafta or Gatt...never in the least. China policy in my opinion is driven by our very large corporate base now exporting out of China. The only other reason for your statement is your belief in my support for global trade.
If neither is true, please expand a bit on why you think my rant was phony...
SR
No no no.
This is not not fighting.
Bush did not have to say what he said.
This was an overt and planned comment meant to appease.
If the isue were simply not to fight, he could have avoided the subject (as was always done until Clinton in 1998).
Instead he overtly sided with the Chinese communists.
How long has American policy been the recognition of an "independent" Taiwan? What flurry of international events did the Bush statement unleash?
What emotional interest do you have in the issue to erupt so needlessly?
Idiocy and fraud.
I will tell you and provide the published op-eds if you want.
But you will have to agree before to admit you really don't have any idea what you are talking about and are full of hot air.
Hao bu hao?
You have been spewing nothing but uninformed gloss or spin.
Your comments do reflect certain foggy headed thoughts and arguments out there, though.
I was hoping Bush know better than to believe you snake oilers.
So, what say you?
I provide the names and op-eds, you then bow down gracefully and admit you know nothing on this topic and stop spreading misinformation?
OK?
So why do China nuts wait until Bush is President to complain about the policy. This policy has not been debated by anyone with any substance for decades. TAiwan says there is only one China too; does that mean you want us to help them invade the mainland and wipe out Beijing? Get a grip. This one was lost back in '47, the year of my birth (but dont blame it on me).
We have also never stated we do not support it.
That is novel. Brand new for a POTUS to have ever said.
The phrasing used used in policy documents has always fudged the issue.
Yes. This time he used no fudge in explicitly siding with the Chinese communists.
This was as bad as what Clinton did.
Worse because George Bush should know better.
There is no explaining this away or getting around it. It is a major mistake on President Bush's part and will harm his presidency.
Read and post the 1972 Shangahi communique where Taiwan is mentioned.
Then acknowledge your mistake and apologize to this forum for misleading them.
Think, guys, think. He needs the area peaceful right now, and this will help keep it that way. In the meantime he is arming Taiwan bigtime. That's not a sellout.
Actually, listening to his speeches (including his masterful Chinese speech to the students, that made me proud to be a Republican) I am convinced that he is in favor of one China one day - when the mainland becomes free and adopts TAIWAN'S system - not the other way around!
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.