Should the U.S. support Taiwan's right to independence?

[JohnLocke]

Poll question: Should the U.S. support Taiwan's right to independence?

Why not an independent Taiwan?
by Nathan Mirsky -- International Herald-Tribune
Tuesday, March 23, 2004

TAIPEI -- After a tumultuous week in Taiwan, climaxing in an assassination attempt on President Chen Shui-bian and his paper-thin re-election victory the next day, one thing is clear: Taiwan is an independent democracy, the first-ever on Chinese soil, and Beijing should be urged to accept the status quo.
For years, China has said that if Taiwan declared independence, Beijing reserved the right to use force. But not only do Chen and those around him freely use the word independent, so did his predecessor, President Lee Teng-hui. Taiwan's last Kuomintang high official, elected president in 1996, Lee made a point of telling me in 1997 that "Taiwan is an independent country"; the response in Beijing was mild irritation, no more.
Yet a few months ago when Chen announced that he intended to add a referendum question on election day, asking Taiwanese in essence if they wanted to be independent, President George W. Bush surprised the international community by describing this as "provocation." At the time, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao was visiting Washington, and it was assumed that Bush was trying to please his guest - and indeed the Chinese were loud in their praise.
(...)
Washington has always hailed Taiwan's steady progress, beginning in the late 1970s, from an autocracy not much different from the mainland's to genuine democracy. If Taiwan is indeed a democracy and an independent one at that, Washington should not tell it how to behave. This is especially so now that Chen has won a second term with just over 50 percent of the vote, compared with under 40 percent four years ago.
(...)
What is required is recognition in Washington that a democratic Taiwan is a good thing, though far from perfect - official corruption there is endemic - and should be left to become even better. Beijing should be encouraged to accept that Taiwan does not threaten China's genuine self-interest.
----
Jonathan Mirsky is a former East Asia editor of The Times of London.
----
Read the rest here.

[JohnLocke]

1. All right, who voted no?

:grr: -- :grr: -- :grr:

[methinks2]

2. yes

we should support the idea of a democratic TAiwan. But beware what the military types do when we start supporting other peoples countries. Remember what we just did in Haiti. That should never happen again.

[IrateCitizen]

3. I voted no, and I'll tell you exactly why

Because the United States needs to do what it can to curry favor with the East Asian nations, that's why. Because our standing in the Pacific Rim is absolutely FUCKED, that's why.

When the East Asian Financial Crisis of 1997 hit and suddenly those nations in East Asia saw their economies nearly collapse -- and THEN saw US firms swoop in to buy up assets at reduced costs while many of their citizens were thrown into poverty -- what effect do you think that had on our standing? When we stuck our nose in and ruined rapproachment efforts between South and North Korea, what effect do you think that had on our standing? When our politicians, out of pure political posturing, call for sending gunboats to the Strait of Taiwan, what effect do you think that has on our standing in the region.

Anyone who thinks that the US should suddenly stand up for Taiwanese independence is an idiot, to be quite blunt. Relations between Taiwan and China are quite manageable within the realm of Pacific Rim states, the LAST thing they need is a nation that has recently exhibited the diplomatic skills in the region akin to those of a grizzly bear during feeding season sticking its nose in where it doesn't belong.

If you would do some deep research on foreign relationships in the region, you would realize that there is no way in hell that China will attack Taiwan, and that Taiwan really isn't dumb enough to claim independence to antagonize their much poorer mainland neighbor -- because Taiwan has more to lose from a Chinese invasion than the other way around.

[JohnLocke]

4. Kick (nt).

[Mattforclark]

5. Well said, n/t

[Robbien]

6. Hmmmm. Interesting.

So, if we officially support Taiwan we will exacerbate the situation. If the wise course then would be to stay away, why did Bush say he supported China and its bid for Taiwanese unification? Or is that just posturing with no real effect?

[IrateCitizen]

15. Bush said that because he is an idiot

The wise course, given the present situation, is of course to stay away. This is a matter for primarily the countries of East Asia to deal with -- as they have been dealing with it for the past 50 years.

Look, China knows full well that invading Taiwan is most certainly NOT in their best interest, just as Taiwan knows that openly provoking the mainland is not in their interest either. There are many more dynamics at play here than simply Taiwan vs. China. Japan has a vested economic interest as well. Taiwan has invested a lot of capital in Vietnam, which has resulted in Vietnam basically taking Taiwan's side against China (not that VN and China have ever been real close anyway). South Korea has also invested in Chinese economic growth, and NK and China are not exactly on good terms.

IOW, the "sides" on this issue are quite complex -- to the point that it's more a tangled web of interests than anything approaching "sides". One of the biggest problems is the US insistence that East Asian issues like this NOT be allowed to be worked out by East Asian nations. Being as clumsy with the cultural issues involved as we are, we usually end up only making a normal situation of diplomacy markedly WORSE due to our own interference.

[robertpaulsen]

10. Another "idiot" who voted yes

I'm a little confused by your tone. It sounds like you don't support Taiwan independence because it's not politically expedient. Are you including China as one of the nations that we need to "curry favor" with?

While I do agree with you that the last thing we need is our current belligerent administration stirring another shitstorm, I think the original poster was asking whether our country, in principle, should support Taiwan independence. At least that's how I interpreted it.

[Mattforclark]

12. political expedience in foreign policy

International relations is all about political expedience.

Not acting politically expediently may result in death or injury.

We should, in principle, in private, support Taiwanese independence, which is what we have been doing for some time now. We shouldn't go around trumpeting how wonderful it is that the PRC does not own the island of Taiwan.

[IrateCitizen]

16. No, you're making this much simpler than it really is

Relations between East Asian nations on this issue are not at all drawn up on "sides" -- but rather, are more like a tangled diplomatic web. For example, Japan and South Korea have a lot of money invested in China, so THEY don't want to see an open conflict. OTOH, Taiwan has, over the past decades, invested capital in North Korea and Vietnam -- so both of those nations would be hostile to any Chinese aggression.

Taiwan, with its significant economic base, knows that it would stand to lose quite a bit of its current economic standing from provoking a Chinese attack -- even though Taiwan possesses a highly technological Air Force and would most certainly repel such an aggression. China knows that provoking its neighbors in NK and VN by invading Taiwan -- in addition to probably losing massive amounts of SK and Japanese capital investment -- would be disastrous.

The reason I don't support US involvement in this is because it's none of our f***ing business. All we will do is make the situation worse by getting involved. If anything, our belligerence toward China could be perceived as efforts of "containment". Such efforts are futile, in the long run. It's not a question of "if", but rather of "when" China will become a developmental power -- the likes of which will make Japan and South Korea seem like minor players on the economic world stage. The US can either just accept this fact, and figure out how to deal with the changing world in a diplomatic manner -- or they can fight it through ultimately doomed maneuvers like openly supporting Taiwanese independence.

THAT is the point I was trying to make. We tend to look at matters like this through Americentric eyes, believing in the necessity of championing Wilsonian idealism about democracy and open markets. If you take the time to step back and look at it from the perspective of all the players involved, it can become quite clear that our involvement is not needed on this issue -- nor is it really WANTED by any of the countries more intimately involved.

[renegade000]

14. exactly...let it be

play both sides in the status quo....eventually china will be more democratized and then a more open dialogue of independence vs. reunification can be reestablished...

of course i'm a bit biased, my grandfather fought with the KMT...but this is an entirely other story.

[camero]

7. Anybody remember the Bush slip before 9/11?

Where he said that we would do anything to defend Taiwan and the outrage it caused in diplomatic circles. We have been walking a fine line for a very long time over this.

Taiwan has the force of arms to defend itself. So, I'm not really sure whether a statement of open support is the right thing to do at this time.

[Mattforclark]

8. Yes

"So, I'm not really sure whether a statement of open support is the right thing to do at this time."

Provacative words that mean little to nothing substantive in any case should be avoided in diplomatic activity.

It just doesn't make sense. Just like ANNOUNCING a policy of "pre-emption" (prevention) just doesn't make sense. It's flat out stupid.

[camero]

9. Why I'm conflicted

Personally, I think a free Taiwan is the way to go. But if we say outright that we were for Taiwanese independence, it may invite an attack from the mainland while we are fooling around elsewhere.

I don't think anyone has planned for a war on 3 fronts. Even a draft wouldn't give us enough manpower.

I haven't really kept up to date on Pan-Asian relations lately I'll admit.

[Mattforclark]

11. I hear you

"Personally, I think a free Taiwan is the way to go."

Yeah. That's what we have now, in all but name.

"But if we say outright that we were for Taiwanese independence, it may invite an attack from the mainland while we are fooling around elsewhere. I don't think anyone has planned for a war on 3 fronts. Even a draft wouldn't give us enough manpower."

I don't think that there is much chance of an actual invasion. The chinese navy is not all that hot. It would probably be more of an unnecessary provocation rather than trigger an invasion.

The US Army and to a limited extent air force is what is tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan. We don't have hordes of attack submarines or cruisers in the Persian gulf waiting to shoot cruise missiles towards Baghdad (or at least I hope we don't). Any possible invasion of Taiwan would have to go through air and sea, not over land.

[camero]

13. Oh ok

I was thinking of a cruise missile attack (non-nuclear). You're right. It would take alot of amphibious vehicles to actually enter Taiwan and even if our Navy and Air Force was stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan, they probably could be dispatched pretty quickly.

[IrateCitizen]

18. Do you realize that the Taiwanese Air Force is one of the...

... most technologically-advanced in the world? Their air force has HUNDREDS of top-notch fighter aircraft with highly-trained pilots.

Any Chinese invasion would be doomed to failure, and the Chinese know this. Not only that, but the ramifications for both among their East Asian neighbors would be catastrophic -- which they both know as well.

Eventually the two probably WILL unify to a certain degree. Just not until China experiences a much greater economic development -- and possibly as part of an East Asian alliance against the inevitability of continued US striving for military hegemony in the region.

[Mattforclark]

19. Yes

the Taiwanese could probably hold off the chinese pretty well by themselves, just as the South Koreans could do the same against the North Koreans. But the previous post was about any possible US involvement/help in the event of an attempted Chinese invasion.

[IrateCitizen]

17. And here is the problem, camero...

I haven't really kept up to date on Pan-Asian relations lately I'll admit.

To be quite honest, neither have the hare-brained politicians who make pronouncements about "defending Taiwan" for the purpose of pure political posturing without thinking about the ramifications.

This situation is far more complex than we realize, looking at it from our Americentric perspective. See my other posts on this thread for a little further explanation.

[camero]

20. I see what you're saying

That the countries in East Asia are so linked together economically that any hostilities would be against that country's self-interest and that most of this is diplomatic hot air so to speak and that we should just leave them alone so they can work thier problems out themselves.

The Bushies economic and militaristic exploitation of East Asia could actually unite East Asia against us. I am speaking of American Troops in Indonesia.

Great posts and thanks for the explanation. I was just thinking of the policies of the last 30 years where we paid lip service to the idea of Taiwanese democracy while supporting the One-China deal.