Washington Must Change Cross-Strait Policy, Says Expert
Clinton Administration Official Calls for New Stance as 'Strategic Ambiguity' can no Longer Prevent a China-Taiwan Conflict
06/22/2004
Chua Sok Peng,
The Straits Times Interactive
WASHINGTON'S policy of 'strategic ambiguity' towards China and Taiwan is no longer effective, according to China expert Susan Shirk, who said it would need to be more pro-active to resolve the increasingly tense cross-strait situation.
In a keynote address at a conference on Taiwan's New Challenges, Professor Shirk said the starting point for US policy towards the China- Taiwan relationship must be its own security interests.
'Washington has a very clear security interest in preventing a military conflict across the strait, through which we will be drawn in,' said the former deputy assistant secretary of state for China under the Clinton administration.
She emphasised that the democratisation of Taiwan and re-election of pro-independence President Chen Shui-bian implied that 'America's declaratory formula which aims to reassure and deter both sides simultaneously' was no longer adequate in preventing a cross-strait conflict.
Hence, Washington needs to adopt a new approach and actively prevent cross-strait military conflicts by bringing Beijing and Taipei to the negotiating table, Prof Shirk said at the conference organised by the East Asian Institute.
She called for a resumption of dialogue, like the 1998 meeting in Shanghai where the heads of the two semi-official bodies handling relations between the two sides exchanged views with no pre-conditions.
'Washington could put this issue at the top of our agenda with Beijing and urge it to offer to resume dialogue with Taiwan with no pre-conditions, as it did in 1998,' she said.
Pointing to trends in China-Taiwan relations, she feels that conflict rather than reconciliation is more likely.
This is especially so after Beijing realised it could not win Taiwanese hearts and minds, nor constrain Taiwan through the US. Hence, the only viable option to bring Taiwan back into its fold is through coercion.
Prof Shirk believes that a military conflict could take place after Taiwan's legislative elections in December if the opposition camp fails to win enough seats to block Mr Chen's plan for independence.
Another critical year is 2006, when the Taiwanese leader plans to create a new Constitution through a referendum - a move which China says is synonymous with Taiwan independence.
But any military gesture - whether full-blown or half-hearted ones such as grabbing a small island - will draw the US into the conflict.
And regardless of US engagement in Iraq, 'it will be able to respond to any situation arising in the Taiwan Strait', said Prof Shirk.
She also said that regardless of who wins the US presidential election in November, the next administration will definitely be more pro-active in cross-strait relations because 'if we continue to sit on the sidelines, the risks of a military confrontation are even greater'.
Also at the conference, some panelists said Mr Chen's re-election victory may be indicative of a permanent shift in Taiwanese pro-independence mentality.
Dr Lo Chih-cheng of the Institute for National Policy Research in Taipei cited the 10-per-cent increase in Mr Chen's share of the vote - from 39.3 per cent in 2000 to 50.1 per cent this year.
He said that as Taiwanese become more mature, they have a greater self-awareness, resulting in the rise of a Taiwan identity.
Dr Raymond Wu of the East Asian Institute, however, felt the pan-green victory was due more to Mr Chen's personality.
Mr Chen, he reckoned, was 'hungrier' than his challenger Lien Chan and more intent on winning.
