China watchers express concern
over Bush's statements on Taiwan
By Lisa Burgess, Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON
— President Bush’s assertions Wednesday that the United States will use military
force to assist Taiwan if China invades the tiny island province provoked a wave of alarm
among China watchers, who fear that Bush’s words might have irreparably damaged U.S.
relations with Beijing.
Bush took
his hardest line of all against China on Wednesday, startling foreign policy analysts and
government officials by telling an ABC morning show that the United States would do
"whatever it took," including the use of U.S. military forces, to defend Taiwan
in the event of a Chinese attack.
A
democratic, self-governing island republic, Taiwan lies roughly 140 miles off China’s
coast. Taiwan historically has been part of China. To this day, Beijing insists that
Taiwan is a renegade province that must one day return to the motherland. Any country that
wishes to enjoy trade and diplomatic relations with China must first renounce any official
ties with Taiwan, a step the United States took in 1978.
All
presidents since then have adhered to a carefully scripted "one-China policy,"
which states that "There is only one China, and Taiwan is a part of China."
China
objects to the smallest signs of third-party support for Taiwan. When the U.S. granted a
visa to Taiwan’s president in 1996, China reacted by launching live missiles in
"exercises" over the Taiwan Strait. The U.S. sent two carrier battle groups to
the region in response; military conflict with China narrowly was avoided.
So
Bush’s unambiguous promises Wednesday to provide troops to Taiwan caused alarm bells
to ring all over Washington.
Bush’s
recent statements "have some very serious implications," said Rep. Eni F. H.
Faleomavaega, D-American Samoa, during a Wednesday hearing before the House Committee on
International Relations Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific.
"Our
big concern is that Taiwan does not become a catalyst for war between the two
superpowers," China and the United States, said Faleomavaega, who is the
subcommittee’s ranking minority member. "We have to be very, very careful."
Tensions
between the United States and China have been escalating ever since Bush took office in
January. Soon after, he accused Beijing of selling Baghdad air-defense systems used by
Sadaam Hussein’s forces to target U.S. aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone over Iraq.
Then, China
and the United States came to loggerheads over Beijing’s detention of the crew of a
Navy EP-3 surveillance aircraft that accidentally was rammed by a Chinese pilot in
international airspace near China’s southern coast.
Just this
week, the United States offered Taiwan four Kidd-class destroyers, electric diesel
submarines and other weaponry.
Bush
appeared to back off his hard-line statements somewhat later on Wednesday, reaffirming his
support for the one-China policy during a CNN interview in which he also opposed any
declaration of independence by Taiwan.
Bush also
said in various interviews on Wednesday that his statements regarding Taiwan adhere to the
Taiwan Relations Act passed by Congress in 1979, which the previous six administrations
have read as obligating Washington to provide Taiwan with defensive weapons.
Bush,
however, seemed to take the Taiwan Relations Act one step further, maintaining that it
obligates the United States to use military force to protect Taiwan in case of a Chinese
invasion.
One of the
major questions surrounding Bush’s statements is whether his promise to protect
Taiwan is actually a violation of this act, in which legislators deliberately wrote in
language broad enough to assure a "strategic ambiguity" regarding how far
Washington will go toward supporting the island nation.
"This
strategic ambiguity [regarding Taiwan] has been absolutely core to the relationship"
between China and the United States, said Joseph Fewsmith, a professor at Boston
University.
If the
Taiwan Relations Act "is interpreted as a defense alliance, I think it will have
serious consequences" for U.S.-China relations, Fewsmith said during a hearing before
the House Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific.
Nicholas
Lardy of the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based foreign policy think tank, agreed.
"A key part of maintaining the status quo [in the Taiwan Strait] has been that
strategic ambiguity," he said. Eliminating that ambiguity "risks precipitating
the event you’ve been trying to avoid" — China’s invasion of Taiwan.
But China
experts are unsure whether Bush’s remarks Wednesday signal a real change in U.S.
policy toward Taiwan, or simply reflect the lack of foreign policy mastery that the
president has demonstrated.
Back to April's stories
Page Two news roundup
Stories from March, 2001
Stories from February,2001
Stories from January, 2001
Stories from December, 2000
Stories from November, 2000
Stories from October, 2000
Stories from August and September, 2000
Stories from June and July, 2000
Home |
