[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 96 (Friday, July 17, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8472-S8473]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                THE ADMINISTRATION'S POSITION ON TAIWAN

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, last week the Senate made an important 
statement that we support Taiwan by passing S. Con. Resolution 107. And 
that we are committed to her people, to her government and to her 
democratic way of life.
  While we have made countless statements in this body before 
concerning Taiwan, the circumstances which led to S. Con. Res. 107 were 
different--markedly different--from those in the past. During the 
President's trip to China last month, President Clinton ``clarified'' 
his policy toward Taiwan. He indicated while in Beijing--that the 
United States, in agreeing to the One China policy, had agreed with 
China that reunification would be peaceful. Further, while in Shanghai, 
he went a step further and, for the first time, uttered that the United 
States supports the ``Three Noes'' long advocated by the government of 
the People's Republic of China. That is: the United States does not 
support one-Taiwan, one China; the United States does not support 
Taiwan independence; and the United States does not support Taiwan's 
membership in nation-state based international organizations.
  To understand why this concerns me, Mr. President, one needs to 
understand the nuances of our federal law and policy toward Taiwan. It 
is in the Taiwan Relations Act, which was passed by Congress and signed 
into law by the President in 1979--back when the United States 
officially broke off relations with the Republic of China on Taiwan in 
favor of the People's Republic of China (PRC). Section 2(b)(3) states 
that ``. . . the future of Taiwan will be determined by peaceful 
means.'' We have also signed Three Joint Communiques with the PRC which 
address the Taiwan question. While they all speak to the peaceful 
resolution of the Taiwan question, none goes so far to speak to the 
question of reunification.
  Up to now, the saving grace of American policy toward China and 
Taiwan, if there were any grace to it, was the ambiguity. China did not 
know what the United States would do if Taiwan declared independence; 
or if China attacked. They thought they found out in 1996, when the 
President rightly sent two aircraft carriers to the Taiwan Straits to 
show our strength and resolve--while the Chinese conducted missile 
tests aimed at influencing the national presidential elections in 
Taiwan. But we have a whole new ballgame, now Mr. President. What a 
difference a day makes.
  Incredible, Mr. President. The Administration then feigns innocence 
and insists that the President's remarks did not constitute a policy 
change and that our policy on Taiwan has not changed since 1979--that 
it is the same now as it was then. I'm sorry, but I have to expose this 
for what it is--a world of make believe. If you repeat something enough 
times, eventually people will take it as the gospel. Well not this 
time.
  This is a policy change; and a serious one at that. Considered 
collectively, which I know the Chinese government is doing, it appears 
to be a major concession by the United States on the issue of Taiwan. 
As I said last Tuesday, I know the Chinese; and understand full well 
that they will use it to their utmost advantage. They will tell Taiwan 
and the Taiwanese people that if they declare independence, even if by 
democratic referendum (one person, one vote), that the United States 
will not support them. Case in point, the Washington Post article last 
Friday, ``China Tells Taiwan to `Face Reality' Reunification Talks 
Urged.'' Although I brought this to the Senate's attention last week, I 
think the point needs to be reiterated so that people are on notice. I 
ask unanimous consent that a copy of this article appear in the 
Congressional Record following my remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, so ordered.
  (See Exhibit 1.)
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. This article points out that ``Chinese officials have 
said they plan to use the remarks as a lever to force Taiwan into 
political talks on reunification.'' So let me make sure I understand 
this--the leader of the greatest democratic society in the history of 
mankind, has tacitly agreed to a policy which, in itself, undermines 
democracy. How and why is this possible? Because political expediency 
took the place of sound policy and support for one of our strongest 
allies in an increasingly unstable Asian Theater. Well, Mr. President, 
I am afraid that these developments may have simply added to the Asian 
uncertainty, rather than clarified it.
  In agreeing to the ``Three Noes'', President Clinton has effectively 
stated that the United States will not support Taiwan independence even 
if Beijing agrees to it. Is this the message that was intended to be 
delivered? Think about it--the United States used to maintain the line 
that peaceful resolution was all that mattered because this in itself 
protected the rights of the 21 million people in Taiwan. If they could 
cut a deal with Beijing that allowed the two to go their separate ways, 
presumably our earlier policy would be fine with that. Personally, as 
the PRC becomes more open, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that an 
agreement could be reached. But President Clinton's remarks have ruled 
this possibility out--because the United States will not support an 
independent Taiwan. President Clinton just told the Chinese that they 
don't need to negotiate with Taiwan because so far as we are concerned 
an independent Taiwan is not an option.
  Although most of my colleagues are not aware of this, there is a 
terrible contagion going through Taiwan right now--it is very similar 
to polio. Estimates are that up to one million people may be carrying 
this bug in some form or another, but it doesn't impact adults. Only 
the children. In fact, a number of children in Taiwan have died from 
this disease which, as I understand it, is exacerbated by the heat.
  Well, Mr. President, Taiwan has applied for membership in the World 
Health Organization (WHO)--it is a national priority. But, even this 
application cannot proceed because membership in the WHO requires 
statehood. And that huge island off the coast of China, which we 
recognized officially from 1949 to 1979, doesn't have it. This is 
ridiculous, and it is about to get a lot worse. So, Taiwan is suffering 
from an epidemic which is killing children, and it can't get access 
from WHO specialists who might be able to help because Taiwan is not a 
sovereign government? Although the PRC has never controlled Taiwan, and 
despite the fact that Taiwan has developed a strong democracy and 
thriving, stable free market economy, it cannot particpate in the World 
Health Organization. Well, Mr. President, this seems yet another time 
when the facts somehow lose out to the politics.
  Mr. President, we have made statements reiterating our support for 
Taiwan, but it is time for us to back them up. The Senate should pass 
S. Con. Resolution 30 calling on the Administration to support Taiwan's 
bid to take part in international organizations; and we should expand 
it to include the World Health Organization. We should take every 
opportunity in this body to force the issue, so that our commitment to 
Taiwan does not ring hollow as Beijing's steps up the pressure.

                               Exhibit 1

     China Tells Taiwan to Face Reality--Reunification Talks Urged

                           (By John Pomfret)

       BEIJING, July 9--China urged Taiwan today to ``face 
     reality'' and agree to talks on eventual reunification with 
     China following comments by President Clinton that the United 
     States will not support an independent Taiwan.

[[Page S8473]]

       Taiwan, meanwhile, announced it had agreed to a visit by a 
     senior Beijing negotiator to prepare for resumption of high-
     level dialogue between the two rivals, separated by the 100-
     mile-wide Taiwan Strait.
       The developments indicate that after a three-year freeze, 
     talks could begin as early as this fall between the two 
     sides. They also underscore the important role the United 
     States has played in forcing Taiwan to the bargaining table. 
     Clinton's statement, during his recent nine-day trip to 
     China, was taken as a significant defeat in Taiwan even 
     though U.S. officials contended it was simply a reiteration 
     of U.S. policy.
       Clinton's June 30 remarks in Shanghai made clear the United 
     States would not support any formal independence bid by the 
     island of 21 million people, or a policy backing ``one China, 
     one Taiwan,'' or ``two Chinas.'' Clinton also said the United 
     States will oppose any Taiwanese bid to join international 
     bodies that accept only sovereign states as members.
       Although the policy was first enunciated in October, 
     Clinton himself had never said it publicly before. Thus, it 
     was taken as a major defeat in Taiwan, which relies on the 
     United States for most of its political support and weapons. 
     In Washington, Clinton's statement has drawn some criticism. 
     On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) 
     called Clinton's remarks counterproductive, and he threatened 
     unspecified congressional action.
       The Beijing government, which views Taiwan as a renegade 
     Chinese province, has said it is satisfied with Clinton's 
     remarks, even though it had tried to have Clinton commit them 
     to writing. Chinese officials have said they plan to use the 
     remarks as a lever to force Taiwan into political talks on 
     reunification. Taiwanese officials say they want to limit any 
     new talks to specific issues, such as immigration, cross-
     border crime, fishing rights and protection of investments. 
     China rejects this limited approach and insists a broader 
     discussion of reunification is necessary for improved ties.
       Taiwan and China ostensibly have been separated since 1895, 
     when Japan occupied the island following its victory over 
     Imperial China in the Sino-Japanese War. In 1949, Nationalist 
     Chinese leader Chiang Kai-shek fled to Taiwan from the 
     mainland after his forces lost a civil war to Chinese 
     Communist forces led by Mao Zedong. Since then, the two sides 
     have moved further away from each other--in both economic and 
     political development.
       In Beijing, Foreign Ministry spokesman Tang Guoqiang said 
     Clinton's statement has ``positive implications for the 
     resolution of the Taiwan question,'' and he added: ``We hope 
     that Taiwan authorities will get a clear understanding of the 
     situation, face reality and place importance on the national 
     interest.
       ``Similarly, the official China Daily quoted one of 
     Beijing's top negotiators with Taiwan as saying that 
     Clinton's remarks had helped China. ``This has provided 
     favorable conditions for the development of cross-strait 
     relations,'' said Tang Shubei, vice president of the 
     Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait. ``But 
     cross-strait issues will ultimately be solved by the Chinese 
     people.'' Meanwhile, that group's Taiwanese counterpart, the 
     semi-official Straits Exchange Foundation, informed the 
     Chinese association that its deputy secretary general, Li 
     Yafei, could visit Taiwan July 24-31. Li's visit is to be 
     followed by a reciprocal trip to China by the leader of the 
     Taiwan foundation, Koo Chen-fu. In June, Beijing invited Koo 
     to visit China sometime in September or October, and Koo said 
     later he plans to go in mid-September.
       In 1993, Koo and Chinese association leader Wang Daohan met 
     in Singapore in a landmark gathering that signaled warming 
     ties between the old rivals. But after two years of improving 
     relations, the ties collapsed in 1995 when Taiwanese 
     President Lee Teng-hui obtained a visa to visit the United 
     States for the 25th reunion of his Cornell University class.
       China launched a series of military exercises off the 
     Taiwanese coast in 1995 and 1996, lobbing cruise missiles 
     into the area. In 1996, the United States dispatched two 
     aircraft carrier battle groups to the region as a warning to 
     China not to contemplate a military solution.

                          ____________________