Obama Admin tells DPP to P*ss-Off

[TainanCowboy]

Interesting day for Taiwan in Washington, D.C. The current regime expresses much public doubt about Tsai Ing-Wen while she is on her money hunt in the U.S.A. (don’t even think its about any other reason - she’s hoping to re-cycle some of that cash her cronies have taken off-island)).
US concerned about Taiwan candidate
Some excerpts:

[quote]The Obama administration has warned that a victory by Tsai Ing-wen, the Taiwanese opposition leader, in the island’s January presidential election could raise tensions with China.

A senior US official said Ms Tsai, the Democratic Progressive party leader who is visiting Washington, had sparked concerns about stability in the Taiwan Strait, which is “critically important” to the US.[/quote]
It gets better…

[quote]“She left us with distinct doubts about whether she is both willing and able to continue the stability in cross-Strait relations the region has enjoyed in recent years,” the official told the Financial Times after Ms Tsai met with administration officials.

"The US official said that while she understood the need “to avoid gratuitous provocations” of China, it was “far from clear … that she and her advisers fully appreciate the depth of [Chinese] mistrust of her motives and DPP aspirations”. [/quote]
A bold statement re:the Admins thoughts on her potential.

Tsai has been brought from her relative obscurity as a DPP underling in KaoShiung and groomed for her role in damage clean-up and party make-over after the Ah-Bian (Chen Shui-bian) debacle. KaoShiung…where Chen Jr. is on bail for his part in the fraud and money-laundering while trying to run for yet another political office…KaoShiung - the “Youngstown, Ohio” of Taiwan. A place where the Mafia sends its people to ‘cool-off.’

The DPP isn’t winning any friends in D.C. on this trip…but my bet is the DPP will bring back a lot of cash for their presidential election campaign.

[cfimages]

Interesting times.

[tempogain]

Here’s the google news link to get around registration

link

[jdsmith]

“She left us with distinct doubts about whether she is both willing and able to continue the stability in cross-Strait relations the region has enjoyed in recent years,” the official told the Financial Times after Ms Tsai met with administration officials.

Did they go and forget who’s Goliath again?

[tempogain]

[quote=“jdsmith”]
Did they go and forget who’s Goliath again? [/quote]

Yeah so much for democracy eh? We’re all for it as long as it doesn’t piss big brother off.

[jdsmith]

[quote=“Tempo Gain”][quote=“jdsmith”]
Did they go and forget who’s Goliath again? [/quote]

Yeah so much for democracy eh? We’re all for it as long as it doesn’t piss big brother off.[/quote]
Well, it’s the damn Lefties, TG. Always with the PROMISE of Democracy.

[super_lucky]

It seems to me the “dramatic turnaround” in dealing with China isn’t limited to Ma’s admin–correct me if I’m wrong here but this “blunt statement” says: the U.S. wants what China wants, or at least what they think China wants. Now that the F-16s are off the table, as the article strongly infers, it is purely a matter of time before the “one China” fiasco gets squashed once and for all. Obviously, Taiwan can no longer depend on the U.S. to defend its interests, let alone share them.

Regardless of my own political indifference, this is a sea change, a harbinger, a tell-tale sign, that should concern each and every American in Taiwan, regardless of whether or not they plan on staying here, but especially if they plan on staying here.

And from here on out, I’m wearing something with a little bit of green. Go DPP! You’re the smallest kid in class and the only one with the balls to stand up to the bully.

[tempogain]

[quote]
The Obama administration has warned that a victory by Tsai Ing-wen, the Taiwanese opposition leader, in the island’s January presidential election could raise tensions with China.[/quote]

Duh. Hey, uh, that Al-Qaeda could be a problem, yeah? Boy, that debt could be a bit too high huh?

A senior US official said Ms Tsai, the Democratic Progressive party leader who is visiting Washington, had sparked concerns about stability in the Taiwan Strait, which is “critically important” to the US.

Translation: China has our sensitive parts in the wringer.

“She left us with distinct doubts about whether she is both willing and able to continue the stability in cross-Strait relations the region has enjoyed in recent years,” the official told the Financial Times after Ms Tsai met with administration officials.

Translation: Why can’t we just leave Ma there with his nose up their behind.

[quote]
The surprisingly blunt statement comes as the administration is about to notify Congress that it will help Taiwan retrofit its fleet of F-16 fighter jets. The move will anger China even though it is far short of Taipei’s long-running request for new fighters.[/quote]

Translation: China will be laughing, laughing at how far they have us wrapped around their finger.

For decades the Taiwan Strait has been one of the world’s most dangerous potential flashpoints. While Taiwan has not been controlled by a Beijing-based government for over a century, China calls it an inseparable part of its territory and insists it must be unified eventually, with force if necessary.

That’s a given though, huh. That wouldn’t be destabilizing say, or serve to raise tensions, no, not that.

While Ms Tsai wants Taiwan to strengthen its strategic partnership with the US, she has previously promised to “refrain from extreme or radical approaches”. This is in contrast to Chen Shui-bian, the last DPP president, who antagonised Beijing and the US with his push for formal independence. China and Taiwan did not hold any formal negotiations during the eight years of his presidency.

What push? What a joke. China wouldn’t negotiate with him under any circumstances.

During her visit to Washington, however, Ms Tsai appears to have failed to convince the administration that she would keep the improved relationship with China on track.

Yeah I wonder how she would have done that. If she brought a signed picture of her kowtowing to whichever gangster is in power there now, it wouldn’t have mattered.

The US official said that while she understood the need “to avoid gratuitous provocations” of China, it was “far from clear … that she and her advisers fully appreciate the depth of [Chinese] mistrust of her motives and DPP aspirations”.

Nonsense, any ten year old here “fully appreciates the depth” of how much China “mistrusts” any motives and aspirations here that don’t square completely with their own.

Hsiao Bikhim, spokesperson for Ms Tsai, said the US comments were “not consistent with what American officials have told us in our meetings”. She said Ms Tsai had “consistently reiterated the need to work towards the common interest of peace and stability” and that the DPP would adopt a “stable and balanced approach” towards cross-Strait issues.

Not surprising I guess, hypocrites.

One Chinese academic who advises Beijing on Taiwan policy said China understood that Ms Tsai was a moderate representative of the DPP, but added that there was a “risk that she would be driven to back more clearly pro-independence positions under pressure from radicals in her party”.

In other words, they won’t even consider treating with the DPP on general principle. Just as it was with Chen. People like to paint him now as if he were some kind of fire-breathing maniac, but that’s just more nonsense.

[quote]
Beijing has not commented on Ms Tsai’s candidacy. But when she proposed a new formula as a basis for relations with China, it rejected that as “unacceptable” and warned of new turbulence in relations.[/quote]

Ditto.

[bigduke6]

Its not like the US does not have a history of screwing its allies over.

[Mick]

@Tempo Gain

The US official said that while she understood the need “to avoid gratuitous provocations” of China, it was “far from clear … that she and her advisers fully appreciate the depth of [Chinese] mistrust of her motives and DPP aspirations”.

Nonsense, any ten year old here “fully appreciates the depth” of how much China “mistrusts” any motives and aspirations here that don’t square completely with their own.

No, Tsai and the DPP fully understand the attitude of China towards them, but that is not reflected in their policies. One of the main policy decisions outlined in their recent policy for dealing with China, which was reiterated by Tsai in the US and reported in yesterdays TT was this gem.

However, Beijing must also understand the reality that the Taiwanese people, having gone through the historical processes of freeing themselves from foreign rule and seeking democratization, are opposed to a one-party system and committed to upholding the independence of their sovereignty,”

Beijing will not under any circumstances understand the reality the DPP wants, and I would suggest the DPP is fully aware of this too. When you go around spouting nonsense that Bejing must face reality as part of your policy to deal with China, people politely point out, perhaps the DPP doesn’t understand the depth of mistrust China has for the DPP. Or translated as , you’re full of shit.

[TainanCowboy]

Taipei Times…yeah…I’m gonna base my political philosophy on what ‘they’ report…un hunh…“Beavis & Butthead” Poly Sci.

But hey…there’s always that “Hopey-Changey” thing…
LOL!

[Mucha_Man]

@Mick

…Beijing will not under any circumstances understand the reality the DPP wants, and I would suggest the DPP is fully aware of this too. When you go around spouting nonsense that Bejing must face reality as part of your policy to deal with China, people politely point out, perhaps the DPP doesn’t understand the depth of mistrust China has for the DPP. Or translated as , you’re full of shit.

Wrong, Mick. The formulation is actually quite sophisticated. Nowhere does she say Beijing must recognize that Taiwan is independent and wants to stay that way. What she is saying is that Beijing must recognize taiwanese will not live under a one-party system (which is absolutely true). It leaves the question of a future unification open, or sidetracks it, by focusing on certain preconditions. Those preconditions btw are also made by the KMT so this is both a clever reformulation of the status quo, and nothing really new.

Look, you can be as cynical as you like, but the fact is the 92 consensus is a fiction and is not a stable platform for future negotiations. Tsai and the DPP are working toward a policy that will be both acceptable to the people of Taiwan and grudgingly by China. Like it or not, Taiwanese will decide their leaders and yes even Beijing has to accept that those leaders must respond to local conditions.

As long as the future is left undecided, some kind of accommodation with China is possible. If it isn’t then it doesn’t matter who is in power.

[TainanCowboy]

If it isn’t then it doesn’t matter who is in power.

This time maybe it will be a “[color=#40BF40]Little Green Book[/color]”… :roflmao: .

[Mucha_Man]

The other thing to consider, Mick, is that this is just a trial balloon sent to see how Tsai reacts. If she responds, “you think we are still irresponsible, well, I’ll show you what irresponsible is” then the admin will have learned something. If she responds rationally with a promise to continue to build a mutually beneficial relation with the US, Taiwan’s greatest ally, then they will have learned something else.

There’s no reason to take a statement by an un-named official at face value.

[Mick]

[quote=“Mucha Man”]
Wrong, Mick. The formulation is actually quite sophisticated. Nowhere does she say Beijing must recognize that Taiwan is independent and wants to stay that way. What she is saying is that Beijing must recognize taiwanese will not live under a one-party system (which is absolutely true). It leaves the question of a future unification open, or sidetracks it, by focusing on certain preconditions. Those preconditions btw are also made by the KMT so this is both a clever reformulation of the status quo, and nothing really new. [/quote]

Ok, lets link to their policy in full, from the DDP blog. DPP releases 10 Year Policy Platform - National Security Strategy Chapter

4. Build a stable mechanism through a strategic approach of mutual interest: The core of the problem in the cross-strait strategic stalemate concerns conflicts over sovereignty. We acknowledge that Beijing insists on its “One-China Principle” position. However, Beijing must also understand the reality that the Taiwanese people, having gone through the historical processes of freeing themselves from foreign rule and seeking democratization, are opposed to a one-party system and committed to upholding the independence of their sovereignty. The Democratic Progressive Party believes that Taiwan and China must reach an understanding that is based on reality and the fact that the two sides are different, yet at the same time express a shared desire for seeking commonality and strategic mutual interests, all with the goal of developing a stable mechanism that would benefit the pursuit of peaceful development on both sides

I agree that is the reality, but not one that China will ever accept. The DPP would be better off just saying on this issue we do not agree, however we will work towards better relations, keep the door open, try not to antagonize China, although they feel the people of Taiwan should be allowed to determine their own future and will continue to protest against this injustice. That is the reality, not some lie that Bejing will ever soften its stance on Taiwan. But perhaps politically, it’s a truth that the DPP are not prepared to make, so as all good politicians do, they try to make the situation seem a little rosier than it actually is.

@Mucha Man

Look, you can be as cynical as you like, but the fact is the 92 consensus is a fiction and is not a stable platform for future negotiations.

I don’t deny the 92 consensus is fiction, as for being cynical, Im actually all for Tsai in this election. Just on this particular issue, one which is probably of most interest to the folks she is speaking with in the US. Expecting China to bend to your will, lets just say we have all seen how stubborn China has been in the past and people are going to roll their eyes on that one.

@Mucha Man

Tsai and the DPP are working toward a policy that will be both acceptable to the people of Taiwan and grudgingly by China.

Its not acceptable for China to acknowledge that Taiwan is committed to upholding the independence of their sovereignty. Period. If they acknowledge that, they permit Taiwan to exist as a separate state, of which they have no claim to, which is permitted to self rule, which they won't attack.  

This isn’t about me being cynical, its just me pointing out the bleeding obvious. It doesnt make me the enemy or pro unification, just because I point out an irrational policy doesnt mean the “anyone whos not with me must be against me” philosophy should kick in.

[cfimages]

[quote=“Mucha man”]

Look, you can be as cynical as you like, but the fact is the 92 consensus is a fiction .[/quote]

Wasn’t there an article in the news a couple of weeks ago that basically put that to rest? It was by one of the negotiators involved and he said that while the title 92 consensus wasnt created until later, the substance of the agreement was still the same.

NB I could be wrong though, I only skimmed the article.

[Belgian_Pie]

Looks like some people in Washington are brown-nosing Beijing …

[Mucha_Man]

[quote=“Mick”] Ok, lets link to their policy in full, from the DDP blog. DPP releases 10 Year Policy Platform - National Security Strategy Chapter

4. Build a stable mechanism through a strategic approach of mutual interest: The core of the problem in the cross-strait strategic stalemate concerns conflicts over sovereignty. We acknowledge that Beijing insists on its “One-China Principle” position. However, Beijing must also understand the reality that the Taiwanese people, having gone through the historical processes of freeing themselves from foreign rule and seeking democratization, are opposed to a one-party system and committed to upholding the independence of their sovereignty. The Democratic Progressive Party believes that Taiwan and China must reach an understanding that is based on reality and the fact that the two sides are different, yet at the same time express a shared desire for seeking commonality and strategic mutual interests, all with the goal of developing a stable mechanism that would benefit the pursuit of peaceful development on both sides[/quote]

This is not what she has said before foreign audiences. She has only stressed the importance of not wanting to return to one-party rule, and I think that is deliberate (though if you can find instances where she makes the independence claim I would like to read that). The party platform is also stressing that this is the will of the people. There looks to be a very deliberate attempt to give the party some space to work with and also to frame the issue in terms that will appeal to westerners. Why many could argue against a formal declaration of independence, no one can credibly say they are willing to have Taiwanese succumb to one-party rule again.

In any case, the Ma admin, as everyone seems to forget, repeatedly stresses the independence of the ROC and has no problem working with China.

“The ROC is a sovereign country and Taiwan is our home”

Also I never claimed you were against Taiwan so please put that bit of prickly pie away. You were though claiming the DPP are being disingenuous whereas I see them as being extremely pragmatic.

I don’t believe the DPP will win this presidential election but they will at some point. KMT policies are simply not going to be good for people overall and they are quite incompetent about implementing counter measures because their focus is always on giving away as much as they can to business.

[Mucha_Man]

[quote=“cfimages”][quote=“Muzha man”]

Look, you can be as cynical as you like, but the fact is the 92 consensus is a fiction .[/quote]

Wasn’t there an article in the news a couple of weeks ago that basically put that to rest? It was by one of the negotiators involved and he said that while the title 92 consensus wasn’t created until later, the substance of the agreement was still the same.

NB I could be wrong though, I only skimmed the article.[/quote]

No, every article lately has put to rest the notion that anything like the consensus exists. The best explained that the 92 meeting was one, a low level meet so nothing as important as sovereignty would have been discussed and certainly not agreed on, and, two, the agreement was one that both sides would be allowed to state their opinion on cross strait relations. That’s it. Merely an agreement to let each side talk. Hardly what a sane person would consider a consensus.

[cfimages]

[quote=“Mucha Man”][quote=“cfimages”][quote=“Muzha man”]

Look, you can be as cynical as you like, but the fact is the 92 consensus is a fiction .[/quote]

Wasn’t there an article in the news a couple of weeks ago that basically put that to rest? It was by one of the negotiators involved and he said that while the title 92 consensus wasn’t created until later, the substance of the agreement was still the same.

NB I could be wrong though, I only skimmed the article.[/quote]

No, every article lately has put to rest the notion that anything like the consensus exists. The best explained that the 92 meeting was one, a low level meet so nothing as important as sovereignty would have been discussed and certainly not agreed on, and, two, the agreement was one that both sides would be allowed to state their opinion on cross strait relations. That’s it. Merely an agreement to let each side talk. Hardly what a sane person would consider a consensus.[/quote]

If I get time and my Google ninja skills are good, I’ll see if I can search it out. It was the only article i’ve seen that was actually by someone directly involved and not just grinding their political axe to prove a point.