I have a piece in today’s Colorado Daily newspaper on how President Obama can change U.S. policy toward Taiwan for the better…without having to commit thousands of U.S troops or billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to either regime change or nation building.

Here is the piece, re-printed in its entirety:

For 30 years, the U.S. has maintained an “unofficial” relationship with Taiwan.

And while this outdated policy acquiesces nicely to communist China’s absurd (and equally outdated) claim of sovereignty over democratic Taiwan, it also badly undermines the American tradition of supporting democracy around the globe.

President Barack Obama could begin undoing this backward policy and send a significant foreign policy message by simply instructing his State Department to issue new guidelines lifting travel restrictions on Taiwanese officials to the U.S. and allowing direct contact between Washington and Taipei.

In fact, Mr. Obama suggested this during the campaign.

In March 2008, Taiwan held a presidential election. Ma Ying-Jeou of the Nationalist Party defeated the Democratic Progressive Party candidate. It was Taiwan’s second peaceful transfer of party power through democratic elections.

Commenting on the election, then-candidate Obama stated that the U.S. should respond by “rebuilding a relationship of trust and support” with democratic Taiwan. “The U.S. should reopen blocked channels of communication with Taiwan officials,” Obama said.

What is President Obama waiting for?

The State Department issued its first backwards set of Taiwan guidelines in 1979, when the U.S. ended diplomatic relations with Taipei in order to recognize the communist dictatorship in Beijing.

Since then, Taiwan has transformed itself from an authoritarian regime (much like China remains today) and into a vibrant representative democracy with a market economy — precisely the kind of country whose representatives should be able to not only communicate directly with their counterparts in Washington, D.C., but who also should be welcomed into the United States for official visits.

The Bush administration continued undermining American support for democracy abroad by expanding and re-issuing the backward guidelines in 2008.

For instance, high-level Taiwanese officials, including the democratically elected president of Taiwan, are barred from visiting Washington. On the other hand, the unelected leader of China’s thuggish communist party has been welcomed into the White House.

Another rule precludes U.S. embassy personnel from accepting invitations to “official” Taiwan-hosted functions, or functions held at “Taiwan’s official premises” and vice versa.

In a particularly bizarre ban on communication, U.S. officials are not allowed to communicate directly with their counterparts in Taiwan, but rather must send letters to each other through a third party.

As the Taipei Times newspaper describes, “Even personal thank you notes must be written on plain paper and put in a plain envelope to disguise the sender’s official identity.”

All of this, and more, just to appease the Chinese communists in Beijing.

President Obama could change this — without having to commit thousands of American troops, or billions of U.S. tax dollars, to either regime change or nation building.

In his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention in Denver, Obama noted that “we cannot meet 21st century challenges with a 20th century bureaucracy.”

If this is so, how can we meet 21st century foreign policy challenges while tied to a 20th century Taiwan policy that contradicts everything the U.S. is supposed to stand for?

U.S. Congressman John Linder, a Republican from Georgia, has introduced House Concurrent Resolution 18 (HCR 18) calling for diplomatic recognition of Taiwan by the U.S., and an end to America’s backwards “one China” policy.

Concurrent  resolution are not submitted to the president, and lack the force of law.  Rather they are intended to express the sentiments of the Congress in an official way towards a particular issue.

One of Taiwan’s biggest supporters in the U.S. Congress, Tom Tancredo from Colorado, retired last year.  He had introduced several similar resolutions in the past, all of which of course failed…China appeasment runs deeep in the U.S. Congress.   It is good to see Representative Linder keeping the issue alive.

The Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) offers a link to ask your member of Congress to support HCR 18 here.

Read all about it in the Tapei Times.

So has the United States Postal Service decided that Taiwan is just another captive province in Communist China’s empire? And if so, does this mean the post office is now setting U.S. foreign policy?

On his Taiwan focused blog, The View From Taiwan, Michael Turton has a great post (pics included) on the United States Postal Service’s apparent practice of stamping packages addressed to Taiwan with “Taiwan, Province of China.”

Turton’s post includes lots of details, possible conclusions and good questions regarding this practice, so check it out. Turton concludes:

Let me add this simple fact: the policy of the US government is, and has been for the last five decades, that the status of Taiwan is undetermined. As a government entity, USPS should not be flouting official policy.

What a world…the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) is criticizing Taiwan’s democratically elected government for its recent, and very un-democratic, crackdown on recent protests by Taiwanese citizens.  The great irony is that the KMT run Taiwan government suppressed the freedoms of speech and assembly of its own people in an effort to appease a visiting official from Communist China, one of the world’s great human rights violators.    A very sad event.

From the FIDH statement:

According to the information received, since November 3rd, 2008, the city of Taipei has been heavily occupied by more than 7,000 police officers. The authorities have taken many drastic measures, including: confiscating and damaging private property, harassing and assaulting people who came too close to undefined or vaguely defined areas, clearing communal highway lanes with force, conducting random searches and arrests, and restricting the freedom of movement of citizens. These actions have been taken during Mr. CHEN’s visit, in the name of protecting security.

However, we fear these aggressions in fact aim at suppressing the right to freedom of expression of citizens. To supplement this violence, there are also unprecedented restrictions which clearly overpass the limits of ensuring security. For example, citizens have been restricted from displaying or carrying the national flag of Taiwan, forbidden to declare that “Taiwan is not part of China”, forbidden from carrying filming devices, and restricted from playing any music the authorities consider inappropriate.

These measures seem to be aimed at silencing political opinions rather than protecting security, and thus they blatantly violate the Constitution of Taiwan, notably Articles 11 and 14 which protect freedom of expression and international human rights standards. Consequently, FIDH requests that the National Police Agency and National Security Bureau, bound by the Constitution and the national legislation, should be held responsible for violating their legal obligations. The Judicial Yuan and Control Yuan should immediately conduct independent and impartial investigations into all allegations of human rights violations and hold all personnel in office accountable for neglecting their civil and legal obligations, in line with the Judicial Yuan’s recent statement that “it is very important to form an objective and solid review standard, and make the constitutional reviews more predictable and trust-worthy to people”. Those who perpetrated these violations, particularly in the National Police Agency and National Security Bureau, must be held accountable, in accordance with Article 24 of the Constitution of Taiwan, which stipulates that “Any public employee who, in violation of law, infringes upon the freedom or right of any person shall, in addition to being subject to disciplinary punishment in accordance with law, be liable to criminal and civil action. The victim may, in accordance with law, claim damages from the State for any injury sustained therefrom.”

I posted here about Taiwan’s recent crackdown on protests during a visit by a Communist Chinese official.  Now Freedom House is on the issue, urging the Taiwanese government to “create an independent commission to thoroughly investigate clashes between police and activists protesting Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin’s historic visit and recommend needed reforms.”

From a Nov. 20 Freedom House press release:

Hundreds of university students are currently staging a sit-in in Taipei’s Freedom Square and several other cities to protest the government’s handling of the incident. During Chen’s visit, police reportedly used heavy-handed tactics—including physical assault, arbitrary detention and destruction of property—to prevent Chen from seeing symbols of Taiwanese or Tibetan independence, as well as broader demonstrations against the Chinese regime. Demonstrators also employed violence against police, throwing rocks and petrol bombs outside Chen’s hotel on November 6.

The clashes reveal a need for police to undergo crowd control training that adheres to the standards used in other democracies. Likewise, demonstrators and political advocacy groups must recommit themselves to orderly protests that avoid violence under any circumstances.

The inquiry commission should examine controversial passages in Taiwan’s Assembly and Parade Law, such as restrictions on where people are allowed to demonstrate, and determine whether they need to be liberalized to protect citizens’ rights to freedom of expression and assembly. The commission should also investigate claims that police are selectively enforcing the law.

The visit by Chen, the most senior Chinese official to visit Taiwan since it split from China in 1949, and the recent arrests of several opposition party figures are raising concerns that that President Ma and his Kuomintang Party may rollback democratic freedoms.

There is trouble in Taiwan…and naturally, the regime in Beijing is part of the mix.  Of course, Beijing is part of the mix in many troubled parts of the world, usually where thugs and chaos rule.  But in this case it is Taiwan, a young representative democracy that so obviously functions as an independent state except for the  significant fact that Communist China claims sovereignty over its territory and citizens.

On March 22, Taiwan held a presidential election. Ma Ying-Jeou of the Nationalist Party (Kuomintang, or KMT) defeated the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidate. It was Taiwan’s second peaceful transfer of party power through democratic elections, which can generally be viewed as an excellent sign of a healthy and maturing democracy.  Unfortunately, a recent (and rare) visit to Taiwan by an official from the communist People’s Republic of China (PRC)  has resulted in President Ma and the KMT run Taiwan government acting to appease Beijing at the expense of the democratic values of free and open expression, freedom of assembly and the rule of law.

This should be seen as a significant step backwards by the new Taiwanese government in cross-Straight relations, and a threat to Taiwan’s hard won democracy.

Earlier this month,  China’s head Taiwan negotiator, Chen Yunlin of the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS) traveled to Taiwan…the highest ranking Communist Chinese official to visit Taiwan in over a half-century.  The visit sparked large scale protests against Communist China by Taiwanese citizens.  In response the Ma administration sent in security forces to suppress the protests and ensure that the Communist official didn’t have to experience any uncomfortable pro-independence moments.

According to the China Post:

The most senior Communist Chinese official to visit Taiwan bid farewell to the island Friday, saying his historic trip was a success but that the rivals had a long road to travel toward better relations.

The official, Chen Yunlin, signed a landmark trade deal during his five-day trip, but his mission also sparked daily street protests that were often violent.

Before he left for the airport, Chen thanked the thousands of police who were deployed in the capital, Taipei, to protect him. In a possible dig at the protesters, Chen assured the Taiwanese that if they visit China, they will see “harmony everywhere.”

So just what did those thousands of police have to do to earn the gratitude of the representative from Beijing?  Here is a summary of a portion of the egregious behavior, from an e-mail from a member of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA).

I. Incident regarding the Suppression of Freedom of Speech During Chen’s visit to Taiwan, the Ma administration commanded over ten thousand police officers to keep protesters away from the places that Chen planned to visit. Protestors were making nonviolent demonstrations, demanding reparation from the Chinese government for the export of melamine-tainted dairy products to Taiwan and expressing opposition against China’s intention to take possession of Taiwan.

The police unconstitutionally prohibited protesters from accessing the restricted areas and destroyed protesters’ banners, signs, balloons, and any other materials bearing political statements. In addition, police officers stormed into a record store near Chen’s reception site and forced the owners to turn off a radio that was playing Taiwanese human right songs that might disgruntle Chen.

These actions manifest the Ma administration’s deplorable suppression of freedom of speech. Furthermore, the Ma Government violated people’s freedoms by drawing security lines to restrict the protesters from certain government-controlled areas, without providing sufficient explanation for the restrictions. In response to the protests, Ma simply explained to the Taiwanese media that “freedom of speech only exists outside of the security lines.”

II. Incident regarding the Violation of Due Process of Law During Chen’s visit in Taiwan, the Ma Government searched pedestrians and their vehicles on the streets without any warrants or reasonable suspicion. The purpose of the search was not to find weapons or drugs but to remove banners, signs, balloons, and other forms of political expression. Furthermore, the police also used brutal violence to expel the protesters. Such acts and conducts represent a serious violation of due process of law.

Other instances of blatant human rights violations included clearing out the international airport and the highway of cars, including those of the media; prohibiting people from waving national flags and from saying that “Taiwan is not a part of China;” taking away people who held DVs shooting near Yuan Shan area; and destroying balloons with “lack of conscience” written on them. The police have also removed banners in support of Tibet independence from motorcycles based on the unfounded premise that they violate the Assembly and Parade Law.

On November 7, FAPA released a statement from some nineteen Taiwanese-American organizations blasting the Ma administration’s tactics.  The statement reads in part:

The undersigned are deeply saddened by, concerned with and outraged at the unjustified actions taken by the Ma Ying-jeou administration to suppress mass protests during the visit of China’s ARATS Chairman Chen Yunlin to Taiwan.

We are saddened because the Ma administration, in order to embrace this Chinese Communist representative, has violated and stripped the human rights (particularly the right of freedom of speech) of those who wished to demonstrate their love for Taiwan through waving flags, playing Taiwanese songs and other peaceful ways and means.

We are concerned because the Ma administration, in order to protect this Chinese Communist representative, ordered 7,000 police and rendered Taiwan a “police state”, a phenomenon only seen in an authoritarian country.

We are outraged because democracy, freedom, human rights and the rule of law that were earned with blood and tears by our Taiwanese forebears have been trampled upon in recent days. Taiwan has seemed to revert to the days of Martial Law when there was no freedom of speech, no personal liberties, no freedom of association but only the confrontation between the police force and public.

The Ma administration knows that the majority of the Taiwanese people do not support a rapid pro-China policy. Yet his administration decided to go ahead with hosting the meeting between Chen and Taiwan’s SEF chief Chiang Pin-kung. This decision is to deliberately provoke the Taiwanese people, divide the Taiwanese society and attack Taiwan’s fragile and hard-fought democracy. We strongly condemn the KMT government’s China policies and protest the government for denying Taiwan’s sovereignty and ignoring Taiwan’s human rights, freedom and democracy.

Whole statement available here.

Stay tuned.

In the October 30 Wall Street Journal Asia, the Cato Institute’s Ted Galen Carpenter writes:

Officials in Washington and Beijing seemed relieved when Taiwan’s moderate Kuomintang took control of the legislature earlier this year and Ma Ying-jeou was elected president. But that optimism is fading fast as China’s lack of meaningful concessions has undermined Mr. Ma’s political position. It’s becoming clear that the Taiwan side has done all it can so far. The next steps will depend on Beijing.

Don’t hold your breath.  Really, what motivation does China have to concede to Taiwan anything “meaningful” at all?   Most all of the West–and certainly the United States specifically– and the United Nations as a body,  routinely kowtows to Beijing’s ludicrous claim over Taiwan and stands mutely by while China marginalizes Taiwan’s efforts at international recognition.  Carpenter notes that China has been willing to play along around the edges, such as the establishment of direct air links between Taiwan and Mainland China.  But what about the big things…like Beijing’s threats of annihilation against Taiwan?

Carpenter continues:

So it’s important that Mr. Ma be able to show voters he’s not simply making an endless series of one-sided concessions. Yet Beijing hasn’t been willing to play ball so far. Despite repeated calls in Taiwan for Beijing to remove the more than 1,200 missiles aimed at the island, Chinese leaders show no inclination to reduce that number. Nor has Beijing shown any willingness to allow Taiwan to become a member of the World Health Organization or other international bodies. That unresponsiveness plays into the hands of DPP hardliners who argue Taiwan has gained little from Mr. Ma’s conciliatory efforts.

My Independence Institute colleague, Dave Kopel, has published a new paper concerning Taiwan’s trade policies with China and Taiwanese sovereignty. Here is David’s post on the paper from the excellent legal blog, The Volokh Conspiracy:

Last Friday, I presented a paper at a symposium at the University of Chicago’s International House. The paper was part of a symposium on “Taiwan’s New Approach: Opportunities and Challenges for President Ma Ying-jeou’s Government.” The paper is titled Poisoned Milk and the Poisoning of Democracy: Some Cautions about China Trade and Taiwan Sovereignty. It argues that Taiwan should make national security the foremost consideration in trade policy with China. This would support liberalization of Chinese tourism and Chinese students being allowed to study in Taiwan, the better to win the hearts and minds of the Chinese people. The paper suggests that–for purposes of human rights, and to sow the seeds for long-term political reform in China–new Taiwanese foreign direct investment in China be required to go to businesses which allow Chinese workers to elect a workers council. Taiwan should energetically develop its trade with India, as an alternative to China; should further restrict Chinese food imports; and should get rid of trade negotiators who have business interests in China. Allowing economic integration with China without regard for national security could, the paper suggests, lead to the destruction Taiwan’s sovereignty, independence, and freedom.

I turned my recent blog post on Barack Obama and Taiwan into an op-ed piece for the Colorado Daily newspaper (which is the newspaper of the University of Colorado at Boulder) and which was published in yesterday’s edition.   The online version is available here.

Here is the published piece in its entirety (with one small typo fixed):

On March 22, Taiwan held a presidential election. Ma Ying-Jeou of the Nationalist Party defeated the Democratic Progressive Party candidate. It was Taiwan’s second peaceful transfer of party power through democratic elections, an excellent sign of a healthy and maturing democracy

Commenting on Ma’s election, Sen. Barack Obama stated that the U.S. should respond by “rebuilding a relationship of trust and support” with democratic Taiwan. “The U.S. should reopen blocked channels of communication with Taiwan officials,” Obama said.

This would actually be a hugely significant step towards recognizing the obvious — that Taiwan is a sovereign and democratic nation deserving of formal relations with the United States. It would also be a step that would undoubtedly annoy Communist China, Taiwan’s thuggish and bullying neighbor.

So does Obama mean it?

When Obama touched on “America’s promise abroad” during his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention, the candidate mentioned both protecting Israel and standing up for Georgia. And indeed, the U.S. has a long history of both supporting emerging democracies and standing by existing democracies under threat from hostile neighbors. Taiwan certainly fits this bill.

Problem is that the Chinese communists in Beijing claim sovereignty over democratic Taiwan — even though it is obvious that Taiwan functions as an independent state.

Unfortunately, the U.S. continues to appease Beijing’s claim over Taiwan through recognition of “one China,” a weak and outdated policy that goes back to a 1972 “joint communiqué” issued by President Nixon and Chinese dictator Mao Tse-Tung.

Since then Taiwan has transformed itself from an authoritarian regime and into a representative democracy with a dynamic market economy — precisely the kind of country whose representatives should be able to communicate directly with Washington, D.C.

In October 2007, Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota introduced Senate Concurrent Resolution 48, which, among other things, called for a lifting of travel restrictions to the U.S. by “high level and elected officials of Taiwan, including the president of Taiwan” and for “direct cabinet-level exchanges in order to strengthen a policy dialogue with Taiwan.”

Yet missing from the very short list of co-sponsors for the resolution was Obama (to be fair, Sen. John McCain, along with the majority of the rest of the U.S. Senate, was also absent as a co-sponsor).

So months before Obama stated that the U.S. “should reopen blocked channels of communications with Taiwan officials,” he had an opportunity to both co-sponsor and help push through his committee a resolution advocating for just such a re-opening of communication with Taiwan.

Actions speak louder than words. And Obama’s failure to take action — even such symbolic action as a concurrent resolution — to “reopen” blocked communication with democratic Taiwan makes his statement about “rebuilding a relationship of trust and support” with Taiwan seem like little more than campaign rhetoric.

Beijing’s toadies at the United Nations are still hard at work appeasing China’s ludicrous claim over democratic Taiwan.  From Taiwan’s Central News Agency:

The United Nations has refused for years to issue press accreditation to Taiwanese journalists for the annual meeting on the grounds that Taiwan is not a U.N. member state.

The policy continued for the 63rd session of the General Assembly that opened Sept. 16 in New York.

Taiwanese journalists used to be able to cover the annual World Health Assembly held every May in Geneva, but authorization was withdrawn in 2004 under pressure from China.

If we ever end up with a League of Democratic Nations–leaving the UN to the thugocracies of the world–one of its first pieces of business, after inviting Taiwan to be a member, should be to bar Chinese journalists.

keep looking »

Recently Written

• Downzoning northwest Denver is contrary to sustainable development goals
• Why Denver’s new zoning code should allow accessory dwelling units (granny flats)
• More Communist Paranoia From Beijing
• How President Obama can show support for Taiwan
• Taiwan supporters in U.S. Congress alive and kicking
• Communist Chinese Authoritarianism at its Paranoid Worst.
• Is The U.S. Postal Service Practicing Beijing Appeasment?
• Che and Mao, Icons for the Clueless
• Beijing Pouts Over Sarkozy Meeting With Dalai Lama
• More Chinese Influence in Africa

Categories

• Africa
• Burma
• China
• Colorado
• Darfur
• Denver
• Denver zoning code
• Espionage
• Ethiopia
• Falun Gong
• Genocide
• Inner Mongolia
• milestones
• Mount Everest
• Mugabe
• Nepal
• Olympics
• Personal Freedom
• Taiwan
• Tibet
• Uighers
• Uncategorized
• Zimbabwe

Archives

• August 2009
• February 2009
• December 2008
• November 2008
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008

Blogroll

• Dave Kopel
• David Harsanyi
• Dream for Darfur
• Independence Institute
• Sam Adams Alliance
• SudanReeves
• The Cauldron

Admin

• Register
• Log in
• Wordpress
• XHTML

Search