Vodkapundit - Bad Policy, Decent Result

Bad Policy, Decent Result

Posted by Stephen Green · 10 December 2003

Lots of people are fighting mad about President Bush's refusal to endorse Taiwan's proposed independence referendum:

When it comes to speaking up for a long-time ally and friend -- and for a country which embodies freedom and liberty despite truly formidable odds -- the same administration will cower in fear before a despotic, dictatorial regime, a regime known far and wide for its human right abuses and its despicable record of crushing freedom. And not only will the administration cower like a miserable little rat, it will actively seek to placate and curry favor with tyrants, while putting the freedom, and the lives, of the Taiwanese at great and terrible risk.

Well. . . yes and no.

The situation we have now with China and Taiwan is workable, and the kind of duplicitous, jury-rigged hypocrisy you can get only in politics.

The United States claims to have a "One China" policy, under which we claim there is only one government for the Mainland and Taiwan, and that government lies in Beijing.

We also trade with, sell weapons to, and have an implied promise to militarily defend Taiwan.

Beijing agrees that Taiwan is part of China, yet trades with them and aims 600+ ballistic missiles at them. Beijing is equal parts bluster and profit-taking.

Then there's Taiwan itself. While the old KMT (China's Nationalist government before they were driven off the mainland) still ruled in Taipei, they also claimed to be the only legitimate government for all of China. But, like Beijing, they lacked the means to do so. Declaring independence from China made little sense for a government which called itself China.

In other words, the whole thing is a giant mess -- but it worked. Beijing got to tell its people that someday they'd get back their wayward island province, Taiwan got to rule themselves as they saw fit, and the United States got all the benefits of giving each side half a loaf.

But the new President, Chen Shui-bian, represents a "native" Taiwanese party, for whom de jure independence would feel nicer than the de facto independence they currently enjoy.

If a referendum were held, what would Taiwan gain from a yes vote? Well, they'd get a different color from mainland China on the maps, they'd get a full-fledged American ambassador, they'd maybe get a seat at the UN, and. . . not much else, really. Well, other than the possibility of a ruined economy, mangled infrastructure, and massive loss of life. Independence for Taiwan, you see, could very well mean war.

Beijing, on the other hand, would face the kind of embarrassment which often causes dictatorial regimes to lash out. Read this post (and the many reader comments) to find out what could happen, militarily and economically.

And what would America get? Nothing but grief, lost trade, and a possible war. To be sure, it's a war we'd win -- but my own preference is to avoid war when we can, especially when the status quo is better than many of the likely outcomes.

Just to be clear: I believe the current situation is amoral at best. And yet it works. Taiwan is, in almost all respects, a free nation already. Mainland China has no excuse to start a ruinous war. And the US is free to pursue trade with both. So it strikes me as the smart move to encourage Taiwan wait it out -- because their democratic government should long outlive the butcher's regime in Beijing.

But also to be clear: Should Taiwan hold its referendum, and should the people vote for independence, then the US should and will support them with everything we have.

Comments

Actually,having a "renegade" province serves China well at the moment.The legitimacy of the CCP rests on 2 pillars,economic growth and nationalism.If the economy goes bad they can ramp up the nationalist rhetoric about Taiwan to distract the proles,much like the Argentine junta did in '81.

Posted by: M. at December 10, 2003 11:42 AM

I'm thinking this is a trade off to get China to intervene with that maniac in North Korea. Taiwan is probably in on the plan. They wouldn't want NK to start nuking left and right either.

Posted by: erp at December 10, 2003 02:30 PM

Isn't the 1978 Taiwan defense act still in play? Wouldn't that automatically mandate a US response to PRC hostilities?

Posted by: Anticipatory Retaliation at December 10, 2003 03:21 PM

I wish I could wholeheartedly agree Stephen, but the noises the US has been making lately have not been encouraging. I'd like to think that the US would support Taiwanese independence, in keeping with our professed support for democratic regimes worldwide.

Posted by: Sasha Castel at December 10, 2003 05:39 PM

I know quite a few Taiwanese.
None of them would volunteer to fight for their country.
Most of them think the US is only trying to make money by selling them US made weapons when we try to warn them they need to improve their defenses.

They seem to place a low priority on protecting their country. I think the US should place a lower priority on protecting their country.

I can have sympathy for Israel. At least they're trying with everything they've got. Taiwan doesn't even want to try.

Posted by: been2formosa at December 10, 2003 10:46 PM

The point of our policy is to maintain peace until a peaceful resolution of the Chinese Civil War can be found. Almost all of Taiwan -- I'd say 98% -- would, if there were no consequences, choose independence. As one friend of mine (a 33 year-old doctor with ethnic Taiwanese parents) said, "it's more defensible to suggest that we reunify with Iceland than with the Mainland." Taiwan has moved on. The KMT government of Lee Teng-hui gave up the fiction of "ruling the mainland from exile" in 1991 (to the annoyance of my ancient grandfather-in-law, who was the doddering Senator from Zhejiang province in the Taipei National Assembly) and abolished the perks and privileges of the redundant office of "Governor of Taiwan Province" in 1997. Taiwanese think of themselves as ethnically and culturally Chinese -- as Singaporeans do -- but also as citizens of a new nation, Taiwan. It is a sophisticated and dynamic society and in a perfect world would hold its rightful leadership place in the world, as an example of how to turn a resource-free waste-dump of colonialism, ethnic hatred, and war into an amazing political, social, and economic success story.

But it isn't a perfect world, and the other part of this story is Beijing, which has never for a second thought of Taiwan as something other than a nice part of China that has been occupied by rebels for the last 54 years. China would happily accept war with the United States or anyone else rather than rewrite the maps and give Taiwan independence. This is partly a face issue, but also a national integrity issue. One of the driving motivations of the PRC has been to reassemble the country that was hacked up by colonial European powers in the 18th and 19th centuries. They got Tibet back, Inner Mongolia back, Hong Kong back, Macao back, and now it's time to get Taiwan back. It doesn't have to be today. They are willing to wait, indefinitely if necessary, for Taiwan to come back. It's certainly profitable for them to maintain the status quo, and it would be very expensive to change it. But they are totally unwilling to accept the loss of Taiwan and consider it (without irony) as the equivalent of the United States' unwillingness to accept the secession of the Confederacy.

To us, this may seem like a pure face issue, or some absurdity, because we can see how completely different Taiwan and China have become. But in China, this issue is absolutely front and center, and the result of an independence declaration will be war of some kind. Anything we can do to avoid that is worth it, even if it appears that we are "abandoning" our Taiwanese friends. We are not abandoning them. We are abandoning the reckless, dangerous behavior of certain politicians.

I appreciate the desire to see de jure independence in Taiwan. I love the place dearly. And maybe that's why I'm so adamant that they not do anything stupid. This isn't appeasement of some dictator, the equivalent of 1939. This is an acknowledgement that a peaceful solution exists in the future under some different grouping of governments and leaders, and that the best and only solution for today is for Taiwan to continue enjoying its unique variety of industrial-democratic capitalism, its universities and R&D parks and cultural cathedrals and architectural icons, its cutting edge human rights and environmental policies.

The independence we might help Taiwan buy for itself through war would be a paper victory only. The end result for millions of people would be pain, poverty, and death. It would be decades or worse before Taiwan ever reached the level of prosperity and strength it enjoys today, an in that time, "peaceful evolution" would have made it possible to solve the Taiwan question without war.

I am a Republican, and an Iraq hawk, and I know for certain that applying the neocon moral spotlight to Taiwan would result in a pointless bloodbath.

End of rant.

Posted by: ben at December 10, 2003 11:11 PM