August 7, 2002

MEMORANDUM TO: OPINION LEADERS

FROM: GARY SCHMITT

SUBJECT: Taiwan

There will be much hand wringing over the recent statements by President Chen. Beijing is furious and may yet resort to some form of military intimidation in response. American Sinologists will be cluck-clucking. But average Americans ought to have no trouble making a judgment. President Chen, the elected leader of a flourishing democracy has said, "only the 23 million people of Taiwan can determine Taiwan's future and when it is necessary" a popular referendum for doing so. Could any American really disagree with that principle?

The heart of the problem, of course, is that the U.S. and China still adhere to a "one China" policy. For China, that means Taiwan is part of the mainland, a renegade province. For the U.S., it used to mean that we agreed that both Beijing and Taipei - then ruled by the autocratic Nationalist party of Chiang Kai-shek - believed there was only one legitimate government of China: a statement of fact, not a policy prescription. This is no longer Taipei's position, with the result that the U.S. has slowly slipped into accepting a policy only held by one party - in this case, the Chinese Communist Party. So much so, that a senior defense official is willing to say openly that the U.S. is "opposed to Taiwan independence." The only remaining caveat in Washington's diplomatic baggage is that the unification be peaceful and not accomplished by force of arms. In short, Taiwan's citizens cannot be forced to give their consent to unifying with the mainland but they have no right to make their own judgment on the more fundamental question of unification itself.

This position is particularly absurd given the undeniable fact that Taiwan is an independent sovereign democratic state; moreover, no geo-thinker worth his salt would want the mainland of China to control the strategically central island of Taiwan. Indeed, President Bush's statement that the U.S. would do "whatever it takes" to defend Taiwan only make sense if these two points are true.

Advocates of the "one China" policy argue that it is the key to providing stability in cross-Strait relations. However, the cross-Strait situation is hardly stable. China's military build-up not only continues but appears to be increasing in intensity. And economic integration between Taiwan and China is moving rapidly ahead, rightly causing concerns in Taipei about the leverage its gives the mainland over Taiwan domestically. Moreover, the U.S. is doing too little to counter these problems: Its military assistance to Taiwan lacks urgency and is in many ways inadequate to meet the threat; it seems uninterested in a free trade agreement with Taiwan that might counterbalance China's influence over the island's economy; and it has done too little to help integrate democratic Taiwan with democratic East Asia, let alone the rest of the West.

President Chen's political opponents and some editorialists (see Asian Wall Street Journal, August 5, "Chen's True Colors") have accused him of having broken the promise he made when he took office that he would not push for a referendum on independence. However, this pledge was conditioned on China's abandoning its threat to use force against the island. But as recently as August 1, China's defense minister was reiterating that the mainland would "absolutely…not make a commitment to abandon the use of military force." Then yesterday, China's People's Daily carried a story concerning upcoming large-scale military exercises simulating sea-borne landings and attacks, with Chinese "military insiders" saying explicitly, "the strategic target of the exercises is Taiwan Island." And then today, in what may be the best Orwellian-doublespeak of the year, a high level Chinese official was quoted as saying, "If we want to strive for peace, we have to be fully prepared for military action."

Putting aside for the moment whether or not it was the right time for President Chen to raise the issue of a referendum on independence, there is no question that it is past time that we re-examine our "one China" position. It continues to encourage dangerous ambitions on the part of Beijing and to deflate the hopes of democrats in Taiwan. One would be hard-pressed to come up with a more perverse policy on the part of the United States.