 |
| Deng Xiaoping meets Carter in 1979 |
Submariner, peanut farmer, civil rights champion and Nobel prize winner Jimmy Carter was the 39th President of the United States and a key player in the dramatic 1978 geopolitical switch in Sino-American relations, which left Taiwan on the outside.
The lifelong democrat and humanitarian is now 98 and in hospice care, his race almost run.
Carter’s legacy and his deal to officially recognise China after the communists took control, plus his subsequent role in building the Taiwan Relations Act in 1979 is a legacy all of us on this small Pacific island live with to this day.
Known as the ‘Charlie Brown of American politics’ because of his connection to peanuts, Carter inherited Sino-American rapprochement from the Ping-pong diplomacy of the early 1970s which lead to 37th President Richard Nixon’s visit to China in 1972 and eventually the establishment of diplomatic relations between the US and China under Carter.
Hitherto, the US had considered China as an aggressor after its support of North Korea during the 1950-1953 Korean War, and, more importantly, was supporting democracy over communism. Likewise, in 1955 the US waded into Vietnam to prevent the spread of communism, although it is notable that the Vietnam War ended in 1975, pretty much at the same time as America was seeking to normalise their relationship with communist China.
I have often wondered whether the rapprochement in Sino-American relations seen during the 1970s was based on a feeling by the US that the embarrassment of losing the Vietnam War persuaded them that diplomacy was better than war and that diplomatic containment of China was the better option.
Small comfort to the fact the Korean and Vietnam Wars killed around two million people each if you include all military and civilian deaths. Let’s not forget thousands of wounded, scared and displaced.
On China’s side there was perhaps the same feeling, in as much as losing 180,000 Chinese infantrymen to US artillery and support of the North Korean regime was of little or no benefit to China. Maybe it was better to embrace the world and its markets to build wealth and improve the lives of its population, rather than fighting wars on the basis of a belief in a political regime.
It would appear that over the course of two proxy wars based mainly on ideology, both China and the US came to terms with the futility of it, and decided diplomacy was a better option.
Remembering, of course, that the Cold War with Russia after World War II, and the subject of nearly all spy and James Bond movies at the time, was about a clash of ideologies, ergo, communism vs democracy and not about territorial/economic gain.
Carter’s China visit on January 29, 1979, coincided with Deng Xiaoping’s rise to power and his huge and strategic market-economy reforms which led to him being known as "Architect of Modern China". During my time in Beijing as Reuters Editor for North Asia, I often commented to my friends abroad that it didn’t seem like I was living in a totalitarian communist dictatorship, but in a capitalist society.
Deng managed to create this and subsequently the fear of the spread of communism from China bleed away and the west relaxed enough to establish diplomatic relations, leaving Taiwan to one side as there were bigger geopolitical, and more important at the time, economic issues to worry about.
Which is why Taiwan finds itself in its current ridiculous diplomatic impasse. China insisted that as part of the deal, the US cut diplomatic ties with Taiwan and both sides were more interested in what the deal could bring in terms of money and economic advantage. Taiwan’s standing in the world became a “Ah well, I’m sure we can sort that out later.”
Perhaps with a closer eye on ideology than economics, Republicans at the time were angry with the deal and in April 1979, US lawmakers passed the Taiwan Relations Act, which gave Taiwan nearly the same status as any other nation recognized by the United States. It also ensured that arms sales to Taiwan continued.
In place of the U.S. Embassy in Taiwan, an “unofficial” representative, called the American Institute in Taiwan, would continue to serve U.S. interests there. Over forty years later, little has changed and the architect of the situation is currently close to the end of his life.
While this historical background seems not to have changed too much over the decades, the one thing, to my mind, that has changed, is the Chinese administration. While I was working as a journalist in Beijing I was regularly taken to task by the Foreign Ministry about stories we had written and there was aggression towards foreign correspondents.
I left China as Xi Jinping took over and it is clear his regime is less tolerant of foreign journalists and the administration is more belligerent in the wider field of diplomacy than previous executives.
Therein lies Taiwan’s problem. On the one hand there is a powerful ally, the United States, bound by law to help and that has not changed. On the other hand there is a more aggressive and more nationalistic administration on the mainland.
Indeed, America has recently added to its original 1979 Taiwan act to include other issues. You can view this at this US government website Taiwan Policy Act 2022 but you need to scroll down to find the additions made in 2022.
As a “Major Non-NATO Ally” Taiwan can likely rely on being treated muchlike Ukraine, should they be invaded by a neighboring power. I have purposely avoided the use of ‘superpower’ as Russia has proved it is not, given its failures in Ukraine. The perception that China is a ‘superpower’ is likely also incorrect considering likely reality vs perception.
Which leaves those of us living in Taiwan and enjoying the sunny days presaging a balmy spring and summer wondering what to expect. For those of us who can vote the decision is clear.
The forthcoming presidential election is a single issue election given what has happened in Ukraine and NATO’s reaction to it. Taiwan has leapt to the top of the global news agenda in countries where hitherto the bulk of the population had never really heard of Taiwan, muchless thought about its position in the world.
Since the invasion of Ukraine, the world has become much more aware of Taiwan’s plight and from what I read in the world’s free press the broad consensus is on Taiwan’s side. This has empowered the west to show more overt support of Taiwan, evidenced by high profile visits from the likes of the 52nd speaker of the United States House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi last year.
Taiwan is high up in the global mindset, the world is more Taiwan aware, and diplomats see being on Taiwan’s side as backing democracy vs communism and perhaps heading off desperately sad situations such as that which is fast developing in Hong Kong.
Looking at the diplomatic turbulent history, and the sad and lonely battle Taiwan has endured from China’s bullying in the past years as fighter jets invade our airspace and ‘military war games’ threaten our very borders, I worry about how the electorate will vote in the 2024 election.
The next election has but a single issue - relations with China.
A KMT administration would undoubtedly be more favourable towards closer ties with China, that is a given and something all voters need to understand.
If this democracy votes KMT and therefore for closer ties with China I can see diplomats around the world, including those of Taiwan’s greatest allies thinking. “Ah well, they have democratically voted for closer ties with China so let’s not bother so much and spend money and effort to help protect the. It would seem they are OK with China taking them over.”
There are, of course, other factors like Taiwan’s strategic position militarily in the US Pacific defense lines put in place after World War II, but if the population ostensibly votes for closer ties with China in a fully democratic election, the diplomats pushing for Taiwan to even hold its own in the world may well reduce their efforts and give it up as a lost cause.
After all, they may say, they have democratically voted for it….so be it.
Tinkerty tonk...
No comments:
Post a Comment