On Monday, China reacted strongly to the US State Department removing a line from its fact sheet on Taiwan that said the US “does not support Taiwan independence,” saying the move damages US-China relations.
“History cannot be tampered with, facts cannot be denied, and truth cannot be distorted. US State Department updated its fact sheet on relations with Taiwan and gravely backpedaled on its position on Taiwan-related issues,” said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun.
Guo urged the US to “immediately correct its wrongdoings” and avoid “further severe damage to China-US relations and peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.”
While the State Department fact sheet says the US “has a longstanding one-China policy,” the removal of the rejection of Taiwan independence signals the Trump administration will provide support to the Taiwanese government of President William Lai Ching-te, a member of the independence-leaning Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
Lai’s government welcomed the change, though it did not specifically mention the removal of the language about Taiwanese independence. Taiwan’s Foreign Ministry told The Associated Press that it “has noted that the US State Department updated the ‘Current State of US-Taiwan Relations’ page … with text that is positive and friendly toward us, reflecting the close and amicable partnership between Taiwan and the United States.”
The US formally severed diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979 as part of a normalization deal with China, but in recent years, the US has been increasing both military and diplomatic support for the island as part of its strategy against Beijing in the region. China has repeatedly warned that Taiwan is the first “red line” in US-China relations that must not be crossed.
Taiwan is, for all intents and purposes, an independent state. Chine may not like it, but they can live with it. For the life of me I can't understand why (some) Taiwanese politicians, under American urging, are inching toward declaring formal independence… and thus starting a war with China. How much is the CIA paying them to betray their own country?
Billion$, probably.
On the one hand, it does seem unwise to openly state the truth and risk that being used as a pretext for attack.
On the other hand, it’s probably rather exhausting to go through life constantly scared of openly stating the truth because it might be used as a pretext for attack.
No more "exhausting" than any other conflict prevention between people with strong disagreements.
Do you think the Mainland side is not "exhausted" from all this? At least the Chinese position has the benefit of being based on clearly laid-out sovereignty principles that are accepted/recognized world-wide, including by the US, and the fact that it has never changed. Can you say the same about the separatists and their mercurial backers? What is "strategic ambiguity" based on, other than formalized duplicity? The DPP has been handing out Republic of China service awards to anti-China foreign politicians under the ROC flag and the portrait of Sun Yat-Sen, who dedicated his life to ridding China of such people and influences, and who is by now spinning in his grave like a top on cocaine.
Your personal support for Taiwan independence is well established in these pages, and undoubtedly based on righteous moral principles, but one does get the sense that one side of this complex issue has been disproportionately having your ears all to themselves. Within Taiwan, a growing plurality of people might share your position, but they are not (yet) the majority, despite DPP's concerted de-sinicization efforts over decades.
We've been here many times before. Northern Ireland, Kosovo, Donbas, etc., if people who disagree on the "truth" are "exhausted" by a difficult peace and choose to give up, violence ensues. Very simple.
In the case of Taiwan, a regime change civil war was prevented from reaching its natural conclusion by an external world power for its own contemporaneous geopolitical exigencies. The ensuing stalemate was evolving towards reconciliation by the '80s and '90s, but became hijacked by local politicians under the separatist banner for domestic election gains. This once-insignificant separatist drive is in turn being encouraged by the global hegemon (which previously discouraged it), so that it can be turned into a new cudgel with which to Tonya-Harding a rising competitor (who was once a 'strategic partner'). There are many moving pieces and unspoken motives in this mess, just as is the case with perpetual messes like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. If you don't spend time trying to understand all the pieces, you will never have a complete-enough picture on which to base your assessments.
“At least the Chinese position has the benefit of being based on clearly laid-out sovereignty principles that are accepted/recognized world-wide”
Really? There’s world-wide acceptance of the “principle” that “sovereignty” extends over territory which is not and never has been ruled by the regime claiming said “sovereignty?” The last time Taiwan was ruled by a mainland Chinese regime was 1895, and that was the Qing dynasty, which ceded it to Japan 16 years before the Xinhai Revolution and 54 years before the Communist Revolution.
If such “sovereignty” extends backward, how far? Why shouldn’t Taiwan be subject to Dutch “sovereignty” since it was a Dutch olony from 1624 to 1662?
In another geographic area of the world, where sovereignty is claimed, ask the Israelis how far back in history claims should go?
Fact check says: True.
Taiwan:
Don't become another killing field like Ukraine. After our State Department's Richard Holbrooke repeatedly told Asians that "the US stands by our commitments", Taiwan learned on the radio in 1978 that in 1979 the US was going to:
1. Withdraw all US military forces
2. Abrogate the US-Taiwan Mutual Defense Treaty
3. Withdraw diplomatic recognition from Taiwan
After being treated that way back then, what would make Taiwan believe anything we told them?
When the time is right, Taiwan will become an independent nation.
It’s been an independent nation since 1949.
It just has to be cautious about saying so, for the same reason the school’s 98-pound weakling has to hide his lunch money from the school’s bully.
What were they between 1945 and 1949?
Japan (the “sovereign” authority 1895 to 1945) handed them over to the Chinese faction that was being forcibly ejected from the mainland, which then established itself as an independent regime with the takeover of the communist regime on the mainland. Which is how it’s been ever since.
Whatever Taiwan is or has been, it has never, at any time, been ruled by the People’s Republic of China. That’s just a fact of reality.
Yes, but Taiwan did claim to be the legitimate government of all of China (look up "Project National Glory"). The official name of Taiwan is still to this day "Republic of China", not "Republic of Taiwan". So now that China has turned the tables on them, they can't claim it's unfair. Nor can you as their advocate.
BTW, for what it's worth, my Taiwanese roommates consider their island already invaded by China – in 149 when Chiang Kai-shek, his government, and his troops debarked in Taiwan.
" So now that China has turned the tables on them, they can't claim it's unfair. " OMG. This is not grade school name calling contest. The people living today in Taiwan do not wish to be part of mainline China.
I'm sure you would know grade school since you're still attending it. When you finish it, grow up, and get out of your parents' basement, you will understand the point I was making – that claiming the ROC never had anything to do with the PRC is a fallacy.
I don't know what's best for the people of Taiwan, nor do I have any idea how to solve their differences with the PRC. But I do know for a fact that having America involved is only gonna lead to an unspeakable tragedy – as it has in so many other disputes.
1) Actually, I can claim anything I damn well please.
2) When and where do you fantasize that I mentioned fairness?
And yes, the Taiwanese regime's claim to jurisdiction over the mainland was just as stupid as the mainland regime's claim to jurisdiction over Taiwan.
Tom, Before I retired a work on a project with several engineers from Taiwan. I can say with for sure, they have no interest in becoming part of main land China.
It is stupid enough that US Fact Sheets, Department of State Fact Sheets or CIA Fact Sheets for countries around the World comes from US… They All should be replaced by UN Fact Sheets to maintain its neutrality…!
What? The US fact sheets is how the US Department of State view other countries. They are not a geography lesion. The UN and other nations are free to issue their own sheets.
It's a policy statement. One deliberately intended to inflame tensions.