A recent statement by a U.S. official
requesting Taiwan to "unambiguously affirm" it "did not abolish"
the National Unification Council has revealed an "underlying level
of U.S. frustration" in its dealings with Taiwan over the
NUC episode, an American expert in cross-Taiwan Strait
issues said Friday.
Alan Romberg, director of East Asian Studies at the Henry L.
Stimson Center, said that some in Taiwan are too carried away with
what they consider a "victory" - President Chen Shui-bian's move to
"cease the function" of the NUC - at the risk of damaging an
understanding between Washington and Taipei.
"When the U.S. negotiated the language used in President Chen's
seven-point statement, it obviously felt that, whatever the nuances
of the Chinese-language version, the ambiguity of the English
permitted the interpretation that the NUC and Guidelines had not
been abolished," Romberg said.
"Since then, however, some people in Taipei have trumpeted their
'victory' too loudly, even to the point of seeming to equate 'cease
to function' and 'abolish.'... the impression among many in
Washington is that there has been a breach of faith and that
Taipei's claim of 'maintaining the status quo' rings hollow," he
added.
Chen announced on February 27 that the NUC would "cease to
function" and the National Unification Guidelines would "cease to
apply," a move which he promised "does not involve changing the
status quo." The announcement came nearly one month after Chen
proposed that the country should seriously consider "abolishing"
the council and guidelines.
Not to "abolish" the NUC and its
guidelines - symbolic of Taiwan's ultimate objective of unifying
with China - was one of the "five noes" promises that Chen made in
his inaugural addresses of 2000 and 2004, under the
prerequisite that "China has no intention of using force against
Taiwan."
On Thursday, U.S. State Department deputy
spokesman Adam Ereli issued a rare statement in written form
saying, "we expect the Taiwan authorities publicly to correct the
record and unambiguously affirm that the February 27 announcement
did not abolish the National Unification Council, did not
change the status quo, and that the assurances remain in
effect."
Ereli also said that "abrogating an assurance would be changing the
status quo" and that "we believe the maintenance of Taiwan's
assurances is critical to preservation of the status quo."
According to Romberg, the United States had sought to avoid such a
direct statement, but the way the issue has been handled has
brought the situation to the point where Washington now seeks an explicit reaffirmation
of earlier assurances.
"Now it's hard to hide the fact that, clever use of English aside,
abolishing the council and guidelines is precisely what was
intended and what Taipei thinks it has, in fact, done," Romberg
said.
"Any further statements from Taipei on this or other cross-strait
issues will be very closely scrutinized," he said.
