Who does the U.S. favor in the next year’s Taiwan presidential election?
The Pan-Blue Camp
The Pan-Green Camp
Neither (the US is neutral)
0voters
A recent US State Department press release – U.S. Reiterates Support for Taiwan Democracy, One-China Policy – states that the US “does not favor one candidate or one party over another” in next year’s presidential election in Taiwan. Maybe the State Department does not officially support anyone, but what about the U.S. leadership in general? Does it see one of the parties as preferable? Or is it a neutral observer?
PS. I tried to link to the press release, but it didn’t work, so I’m adding the press release to this message:
(begin text)
Department of State
Press Statement
Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman
Washington, DC
October 18, 2003
Taiwan Election
In March 2004, Taiwan will hold its third direct democratically contested presidential election. This will be another milestone in Taiwan’s remarkable democratic development. The United States supports free and fair elections in Taiwan. The United States does not favor one candidate or one party over another. We look forward to working with whomever the people of Taiwan elect as their next president and vice president.
The traditional bonds of friendship between the people of the United States and the people of Taiwan remain as strong and vibrant as ever. Taiwan and its leaders can count on the United States to pursue a steady and constructive policy toward East Asia and the Taiwan Strait area.
We will continue to adhere to our one-China policy. We will insist on a peaceful resolution of differences between Taiwan and the PRC. We support constructive dialogue between the two sides as the best means to bring about, on a mutually acceptable basis, a lasting peace in this important region.
Whatever its official line, the US will always prefer stability and predictability, and in Taiwan, that means the KMT camp and Mr. Dull himself, Lien Chan.
Whatever one’s political preferences about which camp is the cleanest, the most democratic etc, one must admit that the way Chen Shui-bian and Annette suddenly throw new proposals into the ring is likely to keep US diplomats awake at night … especially if it’s stuff that’s likely to rock the boat with China.
Remember, if tension rises between Taiwan and China, it’s the US that’s going to have to clean up the mess. And it’s already got trouble enough in the area with North Korea’s Beloved Leader and Muslim terrorists in Southeast Asia.
Why? I think this is mostly about Taiwan. It matters which side, if any, the US prefers in the election. For example, if the head of AIT, Douglas Paal, were replaced before the election, I would see it as suggesting the US was pro-green. Maybe we need a Taiwan politics forum?
Yes, discussions of Taiwanese Politics should be in the Culture and History forum (let’s keep them in one place). I’ve already moved other threads like this over there. I usually won’t leave a ‘shadow topic’ like this in the Open Forum, but this is just to let you know. I had thought about a Taiwan Politics Forum, but I think it can easily be covered by Culture and History. Culture and Historyis a ‘serious’ forum though, so topics like ‘Who is Taiwan’s ugliest politician?’ will stay here.
america has two federally elected officers. they can be bought. each of the states have officials elected on that level. they can be bought. each city has local level elected officials. they can be bought. various appointees on all levels. they most all can be bought. the best gov’t money can buy.
who is willing to spend the most in lobbying for them usually indicates which way they are gonna let the chips fall. who spends more on buying US influence, china or taiwan? notice, it isn’t a question as to whether or not such influence peddling takes place, but only a matter of who antes up the most.
the american policy on the taiwan-china situation, i read a book once, is called “strategic ambiguity”. keep em both guessin’. such is fine in the short term, but in the long term…it is a historical inevitability that the US military-industrial junta will tend to camp where the most money is.
I think that US favors the Pan-Green side because they want to see Taiwan remain free and democratic and continue to be a country independant of the Communist PRC which the USA views not as an ally but as a competitor and future threat. The Pan-Blue camp is too Pro-China and could lead to more technology and military leaks into the Communist PRC.
That’s kind of the dilemma, isn’t it? Taiwan moving closer to China may be seen as having economic benefits for the U.S., but it also raises the issue of China more easily gaining control of the island, which would serve as an ideal base for China’s deep-sea navy and projecting power in the region. Does the U.S. want to elect a ticket (KMT/PFP) that seems determined to move the two sides closer, or one (DPP) quite hesitant about it?
There is also the issue of unpredictability, the bane of strategic planners. The U.S. has traditionally been able to keep the KMT/PFP on a leash, but not so with the DPP – the latter are much harder to “control.”
This lack of control could be a scapegoat by the USA to make it seem like they didn’t know about certain things so that they are “off the hook” in terms of their relationship with the PRC.
Taiwan: “Head’s up, we are going to make the following statements tomorrow. Just act like you didn’t know about them and we are “out of control””
The Next Day.
PRC: “Do you endorse these statements by Chen Shui Bien?”
USA: “What statements? This was the first I heard of them. I can’t believe they said those things without asking us first. Don’t worry we will talk to them.”
It is plausible. I always thought that Chen used this earlier in his presidency in regards to comments made by Vice President Lu.
I really don’t think the United States cares whether Taiwan moves toward China or away, so long as the people on both sides of the Strait agree to the same and such move occurs peacefully.
You can theorize all you want, but the documents that form the basis of US-China-Taiwan policy clearly indicate that the US is ambivilant as to which way Taiwan goes, so long as it goes peacefully.
Some opine that the US doesn’t want Taiwan to unify with China because Taiwan is such a strategic interest and because China, already a competitor, will be made stronger with Taiwan. I disagree. The US doesn’t fear a competitor… it fears the possibility of hostilities between Taiwan and China that it could be drawn into. The greatest barrier to better US-China relations is the so-called “Taiwan Problem”.
If Tiawan and China were to peacefully unify, the “Taiwan Problem” would be solved and this would be a great benefit to the US.
After all, the US is the only nation that actually makes an effort to balance the Taiwan and China political interests.
[quote=“tigerman”]Some opine that the US doesn’t want Taiwan to unify with China because Taiwan is such a strategic interest and because China, already a competitor, will be made stronger with Taiwan. I disagree. The US doesn’t fear a competitor… it fears the possibility of hostilities between Taiwan and China that it could be drawn into. The greatest barrier to better US-China relations is the so-called “Taiwan Problem”. If Tiawan and China were to peacefully unify, the “Taiwan Problem” would be solved and this would be a great benefit to the US.
After all, the US is the only nation that actually makes an effort to balance the Taiwan and China political interests.[/quote]
Tigerman, I think you are underestimating the strategic importance of Taiwan. If you look at a map. China’s navy is hemmed in by Japan, Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, etc. If Taiwan were taken, it would not only give China clear access to the Pacific, but also to key shipping lanes. (The reason Taiwan has the potential for being a logistics hub is precisely because of this – its proximity to shipping lanes. That’s not something that the U.S. wants in China’s hands).
I think Tigerman is also under estimating the US State Department’s view of the PRC and it’s “competitor” status. Actually, I am of the belief that US understands that the PRC is going to be a force to rival the USA politically and economically in the mid-term. Militarily it might not be such a serious threat, but politically it could end more powerful than US as it is adept at leveraging it’s economic potential (1 billion people market) to its advantage diplomatically and obtaining support from just about any other country in the world to challenge the US politically. In this way, I see the US as supporting the Pan-Green camp privately, but openly remaining neutral.
Regarding the USA’s desire to see everything solved peacefully and without a war that it will inevitably be pulled into under the TRA, I believe that one day in the future, if the PRC does not keep close ties with the USA or continually challenges the USA diplomatically that the USA might look for a way to indirectly challenge the PRC militarily in order to slap it down before it gets too unruly. Perhaps a war wouldn’t be necessary and hopefully for us unlikely as a potential boycott of China made goods and investments by Taiwan and the USA could potentially be enough to end any hostilities from the Chinese Communist party and the PLA.
Remember the US Spy Plane incident, it is my belief that KMART helped the US to end that standoff with a fax stating that if the standoff continued they would have to source from other countries because their customers were beginning to voluntarily boycott China made goods. A boycott of China made goods while tough on the US economy as well, would spell in my opinion a downfall of the Chinese Communist party as their base of support from the workers would falter as they would be thrown out of work, if all US and Taiwan business interests pulled out of the PRC after being forced to do so by their governments. It would help even more if other US allies followed suit. If extreme military intimidation by the big bad PRC of the pitiful little democratic Taiwan occurred this might be one plausible result.
According to the lead story in today’s Taipei Times, the Kuomintang and People First Party are claiming that a representative of the Bush family was selling talks with a Bush family member for US$1 million.
If the claim is false, as it almost certainly is, the Bush administration is going to be really pissed off at the KMT and PFP.
If the claim is true, the Bush administration would be even more pissed off.
the claim is way false. pure KMT pro paganda shit. Soong is liar bald faced. sicko. sad. yes, CHEn met with Neil Bush but there was no pay off. Soong is not competent to lead country. man should retire or go back to China where he belongs in Communist straight jacket. Lien is a decent gentleman liar, but soong is the worst. wow.
no money changed hands. they just shook hands and chatted
i am so happy to be so far away from the ugly politics of Taiwan’s parties. ugh. however
Korea is not much better. Here they fight on the streets, duke it out!