Panama established official diplomatic ties with China last Tuesday, thereby renouncing its ties to Taiwan. This decision comes as a major political victory for China as it seeks to further isolate Taiwan and strengthen vital economic partnerships in Latin America.

A joint statement issued by representatives of both countries said that Panama recognizes “only one China” and that the “government of the People’s Republic of China is the only legitimate government representing all China and Taiwan is an inalienable part of the Chinese territory.”

And then there were 20: Taiwan’s isolation solidifies

Panama’s decision leaves Taiwan with just 20 international allies. Many are just small countries or islands in Latin America and the Pacific (its only European ally is Vatican City), yet every loss to China further secludes the island nation.

Both Beijing and Taipei require foreign countries to decide whether to forge diplomatic relationships with either the People’s Republic of China (China) or the Republic of China (Taiwan)–never both.

In recent decades, as China’s global economic influence has grown, many countries have found it more advantageous to build ties with China. The latest country to switch its allegiance in favor of China was São Tomé and Príncipe, which announced the move in December.

Taiwan severed its ties to Panama on Wednesday, one day after Panama’s announcement. Taiwan’s foreign ministry said it felt “anger and regret” over the “very unfriendly” diplomatic turn by Panama, which it deemed “yielded to economic interests by the Beijing authorities.”

Beijing has increased its pressure on Taiwan after Tsai Ing-wen was elected president last year. Her liberal democratic party views have regularly heightened tensions with China. She did not endorse the “One China” policy, after she took office, a common practice between the two countries, which agree to endorse the policy but hold different interpretations of what it means.

Then in January, after Donald Trump’s inauguration, Tsai called him to offer her congratulations. China took offense to the fact that the U.S. took the call and because it saw the potential for the two countries to get closer.

Tsai has tried to foster that possibility. She stopped in the U.S. in January, en route to Central America for diplomatic visits, and made a point to visit politicians such as Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Marco Rubio (R-FL.).

Tsai, who visited Panama just last June, emphasized the years of friendship between the two countries in a speech she gave on Tuesday. She maintained that Taiwan would not engage in “a diplomatic bidding war” with China, despite the fact that China continues to “pressure Taiwan’s international space.”

“We are a sovereign country,” Tsai said. “This sovereignty cannot be challenged nor traded.”

An important play for Panama

China is currently the Panama canal’s second biggest user and it’s clear this new relationship will give China an economic advantage over the historically U.S.-controlled Panama canal.

China was funding a $50 billion alternative to the Panama Canal in Nicaragua. However, financial struggles and environmental critiques have halted construction before it even started. Though that project has largely fallen through, China can now comfortably rely on Panama’s canal to circulate its goods.

The Panama Canal Authority also just announced it will be looking for contractors and customers to modify infrastructure surrounding the canal later this year, further providing China with strong potential business opportunities.

Asia-based political risk analyst Ross Feingold said that “enhanced communication channel between the Panamanian and Chinese governments following diplomatic recognition can only be a positive for Chinese logistics and infrastructure companies that operate in the canal zone.”

However, China may not be the only party to benefit from this alliance. In the last few years, two of Panama’s main economic drivers, the canal and its status as a fiscal sanctuary, have taken a hit.

In late 2013, President Xi Jinping announced the Maritime Silk Road plan, a development strategy aimed at integrating and coordinating trade between Eurasian countries. This plan completely excluded North and South America. In 2015, the Suez canal, perhaps the Panamanian canal’s main competitor, underwent a renovation, which allows it to accommodate larger ships and ease congestion.

China’s renewed interest in Panama through this diplomatic relationship can be seen as an indicator that Panama and its canal will not be cast away in favor of newer, more convenient options.

New Chinese direct investments are also an opportunity for Panama to revive its financial and fiscal image, which had taken a toll after last year’s “Panama Papers” revelations.

At the time, many officials had complained that the shorthand used by international media outlets for the Mossack Fonseca case hurt the country’s reputation.

“It’s not about Panama, it’s about one company. Nobody called it the Texas fraud when Enron [went] bankrupt,” vice-minister of the economy Ivan Zarak said at the time. “It’s unjust. You are holding accountable the whole country for the actions of one company,”

A renewed relationship with China could indeed help the nation re-boot. In a televised speech given last week, Panamanian President Juan Carlos Varela, who actually met with President Donald Trump earlier today, said he was “convinced that this is the correct path for [the] country.”

Celia Heudebourg

Celia Heudebourg is an editorial intern for Law Street Media. She is from Paris, France and is entering her senior year at Macalester College in Minnesota where she studies international relations and political science. When she’s not reading or watching the news, she can be found planning a trip abroad or binge-watching a good Netflix show. Contact Celia at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post In Shift Away From Taiwan, Panama Established Key Relationship With China appeared first on Law Street.

Taiwan is one step closer to becoming the first country in Asia to legalize same-sex marriage: on Wednesday, Taiwan’s highest court, the Council of Grand Justices, ruled it unconstitutional to bar same-sex couples from marriage. Taiwan’s parliament has two years to pass legislation–either an amended form of the current bill or a new measure altogether–to legalize same-sex marriage.

If the parliament fails to pass legislation, “two persons of the same sex who intend to create the said permanent union shall be allowed to have their marriage registration effectuated… by submitting a written document signed by two or more witnesses,” the 14-member court said.

Taiwan gay marriage supporters cry with joy after landmark Asian ruling pic.twitter.com/V2DhMFDyPq

— AFP news agency (@AFP) May 24, 2017

Taiwan has long been one of the more progressive spots in Asia: it has held a gay pride parade since 2003, and has a thriving LGBT community. But it wasn’t until the Democratic Progressive Party took power last year that marriage equality became a real possibility. President Tsai Ing-wen has expressed support for equal marriage rights, though she has been more subtle in her support in recent months.

In 2015, at Taipei’s gay pride parade, she said: “Every person should be able to look for love freely, and freely seek their own happiness.”

Last November, DPP lawmakers drafted three bills that would have legalized same-sex marriage. Those bills have stalled in recent months, after protests against gay marriage swelled. Despite stiff resistance from the conservative and religious sectors of Taiwanese society, a slim majority of citizens support same-sex marriage. One poll from 2013 found that 53 percent of Taiwanese citizens favor marriage equality.

Well done Taiwan, we needed some good news ️‍ #loveislove pic.twitter.com/mPiDLt7Wgp

— meg is seeing h (@stylesrichonne) May 24, 2017

The court’s ruling was in response to two cases: one request was filed by veteran gay rights activist, Chi Chia-wei, the other by Taipei city officials. Progressive lawmakers in Taiwan cheered the court’s decision.

Yu Mei-nu, a DPP lawmaker, called it “a step forward in the history of Taiwan’s same-sex marriage.” She added: “I hope that the legislators will have the moral courage to pass same-sex marriage into law, however it is hard to predict how long it will take, at this moment…The opposition toward gay marriage in Taiwan won’t just gladly accept it and give up the debate, so the debate will continue.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Same-Sex Marriage in Taiwan Gets a Huge Boost from Supreme Court Ruling appeared first on Law Street.

Seriously, Sean Spicer?

Sean Spicer has done it again. At the daily press briefing yesterday, while criticizing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for using chemical weapons on his own people, he referenced World War II. “You know, you had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn’t even sink to using chemical weapons,” he said, implying that Assad is worse than Hitler while somehow forgetting that Hitler killed millions of Jews via gas chambers.

I hope @PressSec takes time to visit @HolocaustMuseum. It’s a few blocks away. https://t.co/24fNoMUyS8

— Chelsea Clinton (@ChelseaClinton) April 11, 2017

When trying to clarify his comments, Spicer continued to flub, saying, “He was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing.” But between 160,000 and 180,000 Jews that the Nazis killed were from Germany, according to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. The comparison drew immediate backlash on social media and elsewhere, and Spicer later apologized on CNN.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: April 12, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

On December 2, President-elect Donald Trump dramatically broke from decades of United States policy in Asia by speaking with the president of Taiwan via a phone conversation. This call was the first known contact between either a U.S. president or a president-elect with a Taiwanese leader since before the U.S. severed diplomatic relations with the island in 1979. The event shocked the world, and the statements from Trump that followed only seemed to exacerbate strained relations between the U.S. and China.

The phone call was seen as a departure from the “One China” policy, that has governed U.S. relations in Asia since the late 1970s. But what exactly is the One China policy? And how will this potentially colossal shift in foreign policy from President-elect Trump and his administration affect the future of U.S.-China relations?

Evolution of the One China policy

In the 1979 U.S.-P.R.C. Joint Communiqué, the U.S. withdrew any diplomatic recognition from Taiwan in order to acknowledge the Beijing regime as the sole legal government of China, thus creating the One China policy. The policy reflects the view that there is only one state called “China,” despite two governments claiming to be “China.” This policy differs from the One China principle, which insists that both Taiwan and mainland China are inalienable parts of China. Neither the Republic of China, nor the People’s Republic of China recognize the other as a legitimate government. Officially, the U.S. defines the full content of its One China policy as consisting of three Sino-American communiqués, one at the time of Nixon’s visit (1972), mutual establishment of diplomatic relations (1978), and the attempted resolution of American arms sales in 1982.

This particular policy can be traced all the way back to 1949 and the end of the Chinese civil war. The defeated Nationalists retreated to Taiwan and made it their seat of government, while the Communists held on to the mainland. At first, many countries, including the U.S., wanted to distance themselves from Communist China; however, the U.S. started to see a mutual need to develop relations in the 1970s. Proposals that the U.S. recognize two Chinas were strongly rejected by the People’s Republic of China. Finally, in 1979 under President Jimmy Carter, the U.S. normalized relations with China, cutting diplomatic and official ties with Taiwan. Furthermore, the U.S. withdrew U.S. forces from Taiwan, allowing the mutual defense treaty in Taiwan to expire.

Current State of Affairs

The U.S. has made it abundantly clear on a global stage that it does not consider the political entity in Taiwan to be a state. However, it also does not accept the contention that Taiwan is part of China; the formal legal position from the U.S. is that Taiwan’s status is “undetermined.” Taiwan’s lack of diplomatic recognition by the U.S. and many other nations means it cannot become a member of most international organizations, including the United Nations.

So, that means for nearly four decades, the U.S. has had somewhat of a relationship with a foreign government it does not officially recognize, that government governs a state that the U.S. does not formally acknowledge exists, and resides on an island whose status according to the U.S. is undetermined. The U.S. and Taiwan also have significant presences in each country that have very specific diplomatic privileges and immunities. Taiwan’s president is allowed to make “transit stops” in the U.S. while traveling to other destinations, though is not allowed to make official visits to the U.S. and is not invited as an official delegate to U.S. events. Additionally, the Taiwan Relations Act, which was also enacted in 1979, mandates that the U.S. make defensive arms available to Taiwan, help maintain the island’s ability to resist any force that could jeopardize its security, and potentially take appropriate actions if there is any such threat.

“Made in Taiwan” Courtesy of diaper : License (CC BY 2.0)

Moreover, there is a substantial amount of trade and investment between the U.S. and Taiwan. The U.S. is Taiwan’s second-largest trading partner, and Taiwan ranks as the ninth-largest trading partner for the U.S. In 2015, U.S. goods and services trade with Taiwan totaled $86.9 billion. According to data from the Department of Commerce, U.S. exports of goods and services to Taiwan employed an estimated 217,000 workers in 2014. The U.S.-Taiwan industry includes a vast array of products: electrical machinery, vehicles, plastics, snack foods, as well as processed fruits and vegetables. However, China has grown to be Taiwan’s largest trade partner, absorbing nearly 30 percent of Taiwan’s exports by value. Any significant stirring of the status quo has the potential for grim consequences for the U.S., China, and Taiwan.

Trump’s Position on One China

Despite the strong U.S. stance on One China, Trump took a phone call from Taiwan’s leader, Tsai Ing-wen. It was a roughly ten-minute long conversation, described as a congratulatory phone call. Trump maintained that it would have been disrespectful not to have taken the call, and that he had only heard about it just an hour or two in advance. Just two days after the controversial phone call, Trump took a pointed jab at China on Twitter, accusing the country of keeping its currency artificially low and engaging in military posturing in the South China Sea.

Trump boldly stated in an interview with Fox News Sunday on December 11 that he does not feel “bound by a one-China policy.” Moreover, the Trump transition team has openly referred to Tsai Ing-wen as “President of Taiwan.” This public recognition of Tsai Ing-wen as President of Taiwan openly undermines the only aspect of One China that both the U.S. and China actually seem to agree upon–that Taiwan is not a state.

Future concerns about U.S.-China relations

Many U.S. leaders are concerned that Trump’s flippancy with regard to the One China policy will lead to further strained relations with China. In fact, China expressed that it is “seriously concerned” after President-elect Trump questioned whether the U.S. should maintain its current position. Recent comments by Trump have demonstrated a willingness to use One China as a bargaining chip to iron out more favorable deals on trade.

Critics have further pointed out that Trump’s inexperience in foreign relations could have profound consequences globally. Tensions have already increased in the South China Sea, a major shipping route, as Chinese dredging operations continue in the Spratly Islands–China has been turning sandbars into islands with airfields, ports, and lighthouses. Beijing has also warned any U.S. warships and military aircrafts to stay away from the islands. A front-page opinion piece published on the overseas edition of the People’s Daily, the Communist Party’s official platform, noted that the call set a bad precedent and rang a warning bell in China.

In the past, China has not been afraid to express displeasure with U.S.-Taiwan relations and perceived violations of the One China policy. After the U.S. granted Taiwan’s pro-independence president, Lee Teng-hui, a visa to visit Cornell University in 1995, China conducted a missile test in the Taiwan Strait. The test was seen as a way to intimidate Taiwanese voters into not voting for Teng-hui during the 1996 election, though he did end up winning.

Presently, China has made its position abundantly clear. Cooperation with the U.S. cannot occur if Trump does not adhere to the One China policy. On December 10, Chinese military aircraft flew over waterways near Taiwan as part of long-range exercises. The drills lasted for about four hours and involved more than 10 aircrafts. Furthermore, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang stated, “Adherence to the One China principle serves as the political foundation for the development of China-US ties. If this foundation is wobbled and weakened, there is no possibility for the two countries to grow their relations in a sound and steady way and cooperate on key areas.”

Military action is not the only method China could utilize to effectively retaliate against the U.S. for violating the One China policy or attempting to use Taiwan as a pawn in negotiations. China could make business increasingly difficult on its soil and use state-run media to encourage public boycotts of U.S. companies. Additionally, allies of Taiwan could be persuaded to switch allegiance to China, if given more aid. China could cease communications with Washington and further decrease trade and economic ties with Taiwan.

Conclusion

While the future is unknown, one thing appears to be certain: China will not tolerate anything less than the current status quo. Careless indifference to the One China policy could have serious ramifications on a global scale. If the new administration ignores decades-old diplomatic relations with China, there is a large risk of destabilizing U.S.-China relations and perhaps even sparking a true crisis.

Nicole Zub

Nicole is a third-year law student at the University of Kentucky College of Law. She graduated in 2011 from Northeastern University with Bachelor’s in Environmental Science. When she isn’t imbibing copious amounts of caffeine, you can find her with her nose in a book or experimenting in the kitchen. Contact Nicole at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The “One China” Policy and Donald Trump appeared first on Law Street.

On Friday, the Pentagon demanded the return of a U.S. underwater drone that a Chinese Navy ship grabbed from the South China Sea on Thursday. The American ship USNS Bowditch had deployed the drone to do research. Staff onboard the American survey ship had noticed that the Chinese ship had been following them for days by the time they fished the $150,000 drone out of the water. The U.S. staff then tried to call the Chinese via radio, but got no answer.

The incident occurred about 40 miles off the coast of the Philippines. It is unknown why China would simply steal the American research drone from the water. It was used to collect oceanographic data, and map the sea floor, water salinity, and temperature. As the purpose was biological research, the crew is made up of civilian mariners and scientists. It didn’t contain any sensitive information and was part of an unclassified program, said Pentagon spokesman Captain Jeff Davis. He added:

The UUV [unmanned underwater vehicle] was lawfully conducting a military survey in the waters of the South China Sea. It’s a sovereign immune vessel, clearly marked in English not to be removed from the water–that it was US property.

China seized U.S. Navy Ocean Glider Unmanned Underwater Vehicle ~50nm Subic Bay https://t.co/UxbYQmJ0jY

— M. Taylor Fravel (@fravel) December 16, 2016

On Friday the Pentagon issued a formal protest to China, demanding the return of the drone. Officials said that they were trying to determine whether this was a spontaneous decision by the Chinese seamen that spotted the drone, or a deliberate strategy from senior Chinese leaders. This is likely to further complicate the relationship between the U.S. and China. There are also concerns that the seizure could be related to Donald Trump’s phone call with Taiwan earlier this month.

In the beginning of December, Trump spoke on the phone with Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen, which marked a reversal of the customary U.S. stance on Taiwan. The island wants to be independent from China, while China sees Taiwan as a breakaway province. So normally, the U.S. sells weapons and other items to Taiwan, but doesn’t do much more. That phone call didn’t exactly please Chinese leaders. Then on Thursday, an American think tank declared that China has been building weapons like anti-missile and anti-aircraft systems on its man-made islands, despite earlier claims that the islands are exclusively for civilian use. As Trump takes office, it will be interesting to see how the American-Chinese relationship changes.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Pentagon to China: Please Return Our Underwater Drone appeared first on Law Street.

The controversial phone call last week between President-elect Donald Trump and the President of Taiwan, Tsai Ing-wen, was no inexperienced blunder. In fact, it was the conclusion of a six-month effort from Taiwanese officials to inch closer to Trump and his staff, an effort that received an assist from an unlikely figure in U.S. politics: Bob Dole.

According to documents filed with the Justice Department before the call took place, Alston & Bird, the Washington D.C. law firm Dole lobbies for, had been coordinating communications between Taiwan and the Trump team since May. Working as the U.S. representative for Taiwan’s unofficial embassy, Dole worked behind the scenes, nudging Taiwan closer and closer to Trump and his circle.

Dole, the Republican opponent to Bill Clinton in the 1996 presidential election, helped secure a Taiwanese delegation to attend the Republican National Convention in Cleveland in July.

An entire paragraph dedicated to Taiwan was also included in the Republican Party’s platform this year that said: “We salute the people of Taiwan, with whom we share the values of democracy, human rights, a free market economy, and the rule of law.” This friendly language was also the result of an assist from Dole.

“They’re very optimistic,” Dole said of the Taiwanese in an interview with The New York Times. “They see a new president, a Republican, and they’d like to develop a closer relationship.”

Republicans have long pushed for warmer U.S.-Taiwan relations, which, since the 1979 One China policy, have been diplomatically stagnant. The U.S. does sell Taiwan military equipment, however, and promotes its democratic ideals.

Last week, Trump broke with nearly four decades of protocol by holding a phone conversation with Taiwan’s president–Chinese officials called the move “petty.” China considers Taiwan a breakaway province, and the U.S. recognized China’s claim in 1979, severing formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

Dole, who is 93 years old, has lobbied on behalf of Taiwan for nearly 20 years. Between May to October of this year, Dole made $140,000 for his efforts, according to the disclosure documents filed by Alston & Bird.

“It’s fair to say that we had some influence,” Dole said, referring to the Trump-Tsai call. “When you represent a client and they make requests, you’re supposed to respond.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bob Dole is the Unofficial Liaison Behind Trump’s Call with Taiwan appeared first on Law Street.

In a reversal of 37 years of protocol, President-elect Donald Trump engaged in a telephone conversation on Friday with Taiwan’s President Tsai Ing-wen. The Trump team painted the 10-minute call as nothing more nefarious than a simple congratulatory gesture from one leader to another.

“He took the call, accepted her congratulations and good wishes and it was precisely that,” Vice President-elect Mike Pence said Sunday on ABC. China said the call was “petty,” but nothing too damaging. But was the call–which some advisors have said was months in the making–a foreshadowing of the coming shift in the U.S. relationship with China and Taiwan under the Trump Administration?

The President of Taiwan CALLED ME today to wish me congratulations on winning the Presidency. Thank you!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 3, 2016

The decision to engage with Taiwan’s president was hardly spontaneous, but was a calculated and planned move, advisors to Trump and people familiar with the plans told The Washington Post. A spokesman for the Taiwan government told Reuters, “of course both sides agreed ahead of time before making contact.”

Since 1979, under President Jimmy Carter, the U.S. has maintained an economic relationship with Taiwan (mostly selling it arms), but not a diplomatic one, honoring the so-called “One China” policy that recognized the tiny island as a part of China. China considers Taiwan to be a breakaway province.

Trump, who for months has called China a “currency manipulator,” has signaled he will be taking a tougher stance on the country. Trump challenged the “One China” policy by taking a call with Taiwan, and by referring to Tsai as “the President of Taiwan.” China refers to the president of Taiwan as “the Taiwan regional leader.” Earlier this year, China severed diplomatic relations with Tsai, who was elected in January, because of her pro-independence bent.

Interesting how the U.S. sells Taiwan billions of dollars of military equipment but I should not accept a congratulatory call.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 3, 2016

An op-ed published Saturday in China’s state-run publication China Daily said the call was “a striking move but it does not bear the same importance as it seems to be.” It said that for Tsai, the phone call will “bring nothing substantial but illusionary pride.” But for the U.S., the move could signal a tougher stance on China, and an opening to Taiwan. Republicans have long expressed the need for a stronger U.S.-Taiwan relationship, coinciding with a need to be tougher on China, a key U.S. trading partner that Trump has threatened to clamp down on.

But for the time being at least, the U.S.-China relationship remains strong, and Trump’s team sought to reassure both governments of that in the days after the feather-ruffling phone call. “All [Trump] did was receive a phone call,” Trump’s advisor Kellyanne Conway said on Sunday. “Everybody should just calm down. He’s aware of what our nation’s policy is.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will Trump’s Conversation with Taiwan Damage the U.S.-China Relationship? appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

No Dakota Pipeline…For Now

There’s been a lot of bad news lately, but yesterday the people won a small victory over big corporations when the U.S. Army Corps announced that it would not grant the easement for the Dakota Pipeline to be built near the Standing Rock reservation. Protesters and Native Americans have blocked the construction of the oil pipeline for months and endured clashes with the police that have left many injured.

The army said in a statement: “Although we have had continuing discussion and exchanges of new information with the Standing Rock Sioux and Dakota Access, it’s clear that there’s more work to do.” It will look at alternative routes for where the pipeline can go instead.

President-elect Donald Trump, who is only about a month away from moving into the White House, is a big supporter of the pipeline, so this certainly doesn’t mean the fight is over. But for now, many people are celebrating.

We will forever remember Dec. 4th,2016 as a day of victory, but as we celebrate today, tomorrow we continue to work towards a better future. pic.twitter.com/uP2a2z1ua4

— Urban Native Era (@UrbanNativeEra) December 5, 2016

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: December 5, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Taiwan is poised to become the first country in Asia to legalize same-sex marriage. Lawmakers from the country’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party are working on three marriage equality bills at the moment, one of which is expected to pass within the next few months.

Relative to the rest of Asia, Taiwan is progressive in its social attitudes. Polls suggest most citizens, especially young people, support same-sex marriage, and President Tsai Ing-wen, Taiwan’s first female leader, is a marriage equality advocate as well. “Every person should be able to look for love freely, and freely seek their own happiness,” she said at the gay pride parade in Taipei, the largest in Asia, last year. This year’s parade drew thousands of people.

Taiwan has a vibrant LGBT community. Unlike some other Asian nations, same-sex intercourse is legal in Taiwan, as is sexual reassignment surgery. Discrimination based on sexual orientation is banned in workplaces and schools. Taipei has a “gay village,” with gay bars and shops. McDonald’s aired a commercial in Taiwan in which a son tells his father he is gay (over a McCafe coffee). The video came out on YouTube in March, and has garnered over two million views and thousands of likes.

If Taiwan legalizes same-sex marriage over the next few months, it will become the first Asian nation to do so (including the Middle East), and will join a list of over 20 countries that have done the same. Taiwanese citizens seem to support marriage equality, including 80 percent of people ages 20 to 29, according to one recent study.

A 2013 poll found that 53 percent of Taiwan supports gay marriage, with Catholics and Protestants as the main opposition, though both groups combined only account for six percent of the entire population. LGBT people still struggle with coming out to their parents and grandparents, as homosexuality is still a taboo among older generations.

Friction exists among lawmakers as well. Some members of the main opposition Nationalist Party’s Central Standing Committee oppose same-sex marriage. In 2013, they helped halt a bill that would have legalized same sex marriage. But as the effort is gaining support among the public and the Legislative Yuan (Taiwan’s lawmaking body), same-sex marriages will likely be a reality in Taiwan soon enough.

President Tsai would certainly like to lead her country in that direction. “In the face of love, everyone is equal,” she said.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Taiwan Set to Become First Asian Nation to Legalize Same-Sex Marriage appeared first on Law Street.

The South and East China Seas conflicts are suddenly dominating the news. Multiple countries are claiming ownership over a number of islands in the South and East China Seas–and the debate has gone international, even involving the U.S. But why does the United States even care who owns these islands? Read on to learn about why these islands and territories are so important, and why we should all be paying attention to this conflict.

A History of Conflict

What is under dispute?

The islands under question are located in the East and South China seas. China claims about 90 percent of the South China Sea, including those islands. But along with China, the Philippines and Vietnam both claim the Paracels and Spratley Islands. China and the Philippines both claim the Scarborough Shoal. And Malaysia and Brunei also claim disputed maritime territory in the South China Sea as well.

The East China Sea Conflict revolves around a group of five inhabited islets named the Diaoyu Islands according to China or the Senkaku Islands according to Japan. Taiwan, along with China and Japan, also claims these islands in the East China Sea, although China also claims Taiwan.

South China Sea 

China’s claims in the South China Sea base from ancient times. China documents territorial rights from the Xia and Han dynasties. China uses a map with a nine-dash line to chart its territories that include 291 islands and reefs in the area. The nine-dash line was formulated in China by the nationalist Kuomintang party in 1947 and is still used in China’s maps today.

But other countries don’t agree. Vietnam, Taiwan and the Philippines all have a military presence on at least some of the islands in the region as well. But it is really in the last eighteen months that China’s massive construction has started to spark tensions higher than ever.

East China Sea

The beginning of the East China Sea Conflict can be dated back to the end of the first Sino-Japanese War in the 1890s, fought between China and Japan over Korea. In defeat, China ceded a number of territories to Japan in the Treaty of Shimonoseki. China claims the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands were a part of this cession, although there is no mention of the islands specifically in the treaty. Japan claims to have had them all along, since it discovered and annexed the lands in 1895. In 1937, Japan invaded China and fortified its military strength. This time period really honed the bad blood between Japan and China, as the Chinese people suffered gravely. After WWII, China demanded the islands back, even though China never actually controlled the islands and they were now under U.S. control. When the United States finally left the islands in 1972, post WWII, the Japanese government resumed control. Whether the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands were ceded to Taiwan or considered part of Okinawa (remaining with Japan) remains a heated point of debate today.

What’s so special about these islands?

When it comes to the South China Sea, it all boils down to economics. The area is home to an abundance of natural resources, fertile fishing grounds, and “the world’s most dynamic economies.” The South China Sea holds vital global trade routes, especially for oil. The dominant country in the region, China, could control trade shipments from all over East and Southeast Asia and control foreign military access. The South China Sea conducts $5.3 trillion in total trade each year. There are 11 billion barrels of oil and 190 trillion cubic of feet of natural gas in the South China Sea. If that isn’t enough, 90 percent of Middle Eastern fossil fuel exports are expected to pass through Asia by 2035.

The conflict over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands is a little more complicated. Presumed oil and gas reserves are important factors. But the conflict is also a bit more symbolic–China is now the big man on campus, and wants to show its strength. Nationalism and honor play big parts on this side of the maritime conflicts. Old wounds are not forgotten. “Maritime disputes suggest that China’s rise is not going to be without its frictions,” says Council on Foreign Relations Director for Asia Studies Elizabeth Economy, “That is many instances China feels that its economic throw weight really does give it a greater stance and a greater ability to assert its interests, in some cases to reform norms, and in some cases to upend them.”

Recent Developments

In recent news, the conflicts are heating up due to China’s major building. In the last eighteen months, China has created more “new island surface” than all the other countries involved combined, amassing to about 2,000 acres. Although China already started land reclamation in controversial areas close to the Spratly Islands last year, this recent action is on a whole other scale. China has placed military equipment such as military airfields and motorized artillery pieces on the man-made islands and plans to continue that action in the future.

China isn’t the only one building however. Similar actions have been taken by Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, and Malaysia on much smaller scales. For example, in 2008, Taiwan completed a 3,900 foot land strip on the Itu Aba, part of the Spratley Islands, fit for search and rescue missions and military aircrafts. In a more recent example, Malaysian Defense Minister Hishamuddin Hussein announced a plan in 2013 to place a marine corps on a yet to be created naval base on Bintulu in Sarawak.

U.S. Involvement

The major concern for Americans is a conflict between the U.S. and China. Conflict amongst the Asia-Pacific countries can easily bring in the U.S. We have a stake in the trade markets and no interest in allowing China to control the region and our allies like Japan.

This month Secretary of State John Kerry met with China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, in Malaysia. Kerry pressed for China to immediately halt “problematic actions” and expressed concern for the “militarization of features there.” After the meeting, Kerry was optimistic to other diplomats and called the conversation a “good meeting.” Kerry stated, “We want to ensure the security of critical sea lanes and fishing grounds, and we want to see that disputes in the area are managed peacefully and on the basis of international law.” Still points of contention remained. Although Wang promised to stop land reclamation, he did not promise China would vacate current projects .

This previous May, a U.S. surveillance plane flew over some of the contested waters. The flight was conducted in order to apparently “make clear the U.S. does not recognize China’s territorial claims.” The Chinese sent eight warning against the aircraft from an island over 600 miles away from the Chinese coast. The warning made clear that China considers the area its jurisdiction.

Kerry and Wang were in Malaysia for a meeting held by ASEAN, a 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations. China and ASEAN previously agreed to negotiate a “code of conduct” regarding the disputed regions. But ASEAN secretary general, Le Luong Minh, is not happy with the progress. ASEAN calls for an earlier resolve of the “code of conduct” and for China to stop all building.

Conclusion

We haven’t seen the last of the arguments over the islands in the East and South China Seas. While the conflict may have served as a show of strength between the United States and China, it also involved many other nations that continue to have influence in the region. Moreover, given other extenuating factors like the Trans-Pacific Partnership debacle, the Chinese-American relationship may definitely be heading toward icy waters. Whether or not that will affect the disputes in the East and South China Sea will have to be seen.

Resources

CFR: China’s Maritime Disputes

Associated Press: ASEAN wants China to stop work in disputed sea

CNN: China Warns U.S. Surveillance Plane

The Economist: Who really owns the Senkaku islands? 

The New York Times: Kerry Urges Beijing to Halt Actions in South China Sea

Reuters: Everything you need to know about the South China Sea conflict

The Wall Street Journal: China to Build Military Facilities on South China Sea Islets

The Washington Post: China is not the only country reclaiming land in South China Sea

The Washington Post: Tension with China loom larger as Obama prepares to welcome Xi Jinping

Jessica McLaughlin

Jessica McLaughlin is a graduate of the University of Maryland with a degree in English Literature and Spanish. She works in the publishing industry and recently moved back to the DC area after living in NYC. Contact Jessica at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The South and East China Seas: Conflict Continues appeared first on Law Street.

The United States spends more money on health care than any other developed country. At the same time, studies find that patients in other countries enjoy better quality and more accessible health care than Americans. Why is American health care so expensive and what are the underlying issues that hold the United States back from necessary reforms? Read on to learn more about the U.S. healthcare system and how it stacks up internationally.

How does the U.S. healthcare system compare internationally?

According to the 2014 Commonwealth Fund analysis of the U.S. healthcare system in comparison to other industrialized countries, the United States ranks last among peer nations. This poor ranking is not a one-time thing, as almost all previous editions of the report from 2004-2010 also ranked the American healthcare system the lowest in terms of both cost and quality. The report compares the United States to some of the most developed and industrialized nations in the world, including Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. All of these countries spend much less on health care and have higher-quality services.

What are the problems with the American healthcare system?

The United States adheres to a Selective Health Coverage (SHC) system, also called a hybrid healthcare system. Roughly half of healthcare spending comes from private funds, while the government covers the other half through federal, state, and local funds. The majority of healthcare costs are covered through private insurance companies that sell health coverage to employers and private individuals at different rates. The government provides coverage through Medicaid for low-income households, and Medicare for retired Americans.

High Costs 

As the United States has no universal health coverage, people mainly receive health insurance from their employers, the government, or purchase it through exchanges. The Affordable Care Act, which entered into force in 2013, made it easier to gain coverage, but 10 percent of Americans still lack health insurance.

As each insurance plan includes deductibles, co-pays, and out-of-pocket costs, even with insurance, it could be quite expensive to seek medical services. In 2014, the average household spent $8,000 in medical costs, including monthly insurance payments, taxes, lost wages, out-of-pocket care, and other costs. These prohibitive costs mean that Americans may skip physician visits, treatments, tests, or follow-up care, even if recommended by their doctor.

The American healthcare system is one of the most expensive in the world. Around 18 percent of the country’s GDP goes toward healthcare costs. The Netherlands ranks next, but spends only 12 percent of its GDP on health care. The government spends by various estimates between $8,500 to $10,000 per capita annually, and still requires high out-of-pocket costs for its citizens. Other industrialized countries spend from $3,000 to $5,500 per capita and manage to cover more people and offer better services. Overall, the U.S. ranks last on the Commonwealth Fund’s rankings for national health expenditures. There are plenty of reasons for that, including but not limited to high costs associated with administrative hassles and duplicate testing. The United States is also the only developed country where medical costs contribute toward, and in some cases directly lead to, personal bankruptcy. Even such business giants as Starbucks and General Motors have acknowledged the disproportionately high costs of providing health care to their employees.

Low Quality 

The healthcare system in the United States isn’t very efficient. While most other countries have adopted some kind of unified system of communication with patients and other providers, the U.S. system’s administrative hassles were cited as a problem by the Commonwealth Fund. The overall health of the American population is worse than that of other industrialized countries. The U.S. ranks last on all three measures of healthy living, including mortality amenable to medical care, infant mortality, and healthy life expectancy at age 60.

What types of healthcare systems do other countries have?

National Services

The most popular type of healthcare system in the developed world is a national health services system. In this type of system, necessary medical care is fully paid for by the government. Hospitals and clinics are publicly operated, but private sector institutions also exist. Private medical clinics may have specific regulations they must follow, while the government pays them certain fees. Or, private medical clinics could operate solely like businesses and profit by providing superior, more personal or elective medical care. Many countries employ this mode;, including the United Kingdom, Spain, and New Zealand.

In the United Kingdom, health care is largely supported by tax contributions that are then used by the government to cover the vast majority of its population’s medical costs. Private coverage also exists, often through employers, but these premiums are affordable as to allow competition with public health care, which is free of charge. The U.K. healthcare system ranks first on the Commonwealth Fund’s list among other industrialized countries, particularly when it comes to efficiency and access.

National Health Insurance System

In a national health insurance system, also called a single-payer system, the government pays for all costs, but doesn’t operate healthcare services. Canada, Denmark, Taiwan, and Sweden are among those countries that operate a single-payer healthcare system.

Taiwan has one of the best healthcare systems in Asia. Health providers are employed by the public or private sector, but are paid standardized fees, which eliminates price competition and adds quality competition. In 2010, Taiwan spent three times less (6.5 percent) than the United States (16 percent) in its healthcare expenditures, covering 99 percent of its population. Administrative costs are also extremely low (1.5 percent) in comparison with the U.S., which spends 20-30 percent of overall healthcare funds on administrative costs.

Multi-Payer Health Insurance System

This system of health care is operated by Germany, Japan, and France. According to this model, all physicians are paid from a special fund, which is designated for healthcare services. The rates are the same for all physicians, cutting administrative costs for government, and creating quality competition.

Germany is a great example of a system that provides quality and cost-efficiency. Health services in Germany operate through an alliance of around 240 not-for-profit insurance providers that cover about 90 percent of the total population and are paid from a specifically designated “sickness fund.” The other 10 percent are generally high-income households that prefer private health insurance with superior services and quality. Amazingly, government expenditures for health care in Germany are half those of the United States, and the quality of health care is very high. Insurance companies and medical providers are closely regulated by the government, while employers and employees assume shared responsibility to pay taxes towards the “sickness fund.” Such a system helps to decrease the government’s costs and and provide more people with health coverage.

Watch the video below to learn more about Germany’s healthcare system.

Why is health care in the U.S. so expensive?

The complexity and for-profit nature of the American healthcare system is the primary reason for its high cost. As insurance companies are concerned with profit, they are always looking for ways to minimize their expenses and make money.

Expensive Mix of Services

The United States’ healthcare system provides a very expensive mix of services:

• The U.S. sees more specialist visits than in other countries, which are two-to-three times more expensive than general physician visits.
• Specialists often order more diagnostic tests and medical procedures that rack up the total costs. In comparison, other industrialized countries offer considerably fewer MRI scans, C-sections, and other procedures that could be avoided and are not always medically necessary.
• Duplicate testing is another issue that plagues American health care. As physicians and specialists make money from procedures, they often order duplicate testing. For example, dermatologists can order  biopsies from several affected skin areas, even if only one such procedure is required  for diagnosis.
• American hospitals also contribute toward the country’s expensive mix of services. They admit fewer people and, therefore, charge higher prices for hospitalization. They treat elderly people in the intensive care units (ICUs), while other countries subscribe to more specialized, palliative care, which is less costly.

Administrative Costs

There are thousands of health insurance plans available in the market, leading to variations in coverage, deductibles, co-pays, premiums, and other features. Not only is this system confusing, but such a system increases administrative costs as all doctor’s offices, laboratories, and hospitals have to bill insurance companies and patients for each rendered procedure and each doctor’s visit. As insurance plans vary greatly, medical facilities and patients have to constantly phone insurance companies to clarify details of premiums to find out what procedures are covered by the insurance company. Such a system creates unnecessary administrative hassles and drives up overall costs. It’s estimated that the United States “wastes” half of the $361 billion spent on administrative costs by spending it on expenses that could be avoided and are not necessary.

Pharmaceutical Spending 

Medical facilities and insurance companies are not the only players in the healthcare market. Drug manufacturing companies charge higher prices in the U.S. than in other industrialized countries. For example, branded prescription drugs are twice as expensive in the U.S. than in the rest of the developed world. In 2011, the United States paid $985 per capita for prescription drugs and other medications. That’s almost double what most other high-income countries spent on pharmaceuticals. This difference is due to the fact that other industrialized countries are often able to negotiate lower prices as they purchase pharmaceuticals in large quantities to provide medications for the whole population.

Interestingly, innovations and new medical technologies also drive up the cost of health care. The United States has more high-tech medical equipment than other industrialized countries. On top of it, it also has more stand-by equipment than other countries. The need to pay for the maintenance of these state-of-the-art technologies results in higher prices for tests, scans, and analysis for patients.

More Chronic Diseases 

People in the United States are less healthy than in the majority of developed countries. Obesity and other chronic diseases are more common in the U.S. than in its peer countries. That means that insurance companies and the government will spend a lot of money on managing chronic conditions that often require constant treatment, high-tech tests, and frequent hospitalizations.

Will the American healthcare system change?

If the United States ranks so poorly in health care, why doesn’t it do something to fix the problems? The answer to that question lies in the intersection between money and politics.

Interest-Group Lobbying

Many profit from the current healthcare system, including drug manufacturers, medical equipment providers, specialist physicians, insurance companies, and others who have considerable influence on public policy. The interests of those who make a profit from the current healthcare system are well represented through lobbying. In 2009, around 4,525 healthcare lobbyists were hired by more than 1,750 companies, including 207 hospitals, 105 insurance companies, and 85 manufacturing companies. For example, Big Pharma spent $22 million on healthcare lobbying in 2011; Blue Cross Blue Shield and biotech companyAmgen spent $21 million each on healthcare lobbyingthat year. None of the players involved in the healthcare business wants to lose profits, so lobbyists are trying to block any efforts that can damage their clients, even if those efforts could bring better health care to millions of Americans.

What are the possible solutions?

Even after the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in January 2013, roughly 10 percent of Americans are still uninsured. In order to fix that problem, the United States could work toward implementing another system of health care, but that’s unlikely to gain much ground.

There have also been alternative solutions offered, such as the so-called “managed competition” model proposed by Stanford University Business School professor Alain Enthoven more than two decades ago. According to this model, insurance companies, physicians, hospitals, drug manufacturers, and other actors in the healthcare industry could come together to form an entity that has the responsibility to provide care for specific municipalities based on an annual allowance. This strategy could produce higher quality and lower costs simultaneously.

Another proposed solution is based on the implementation of a universal tax credit, similar to the child tax credit, that provides a $1,000 reduction in income tax to families that have a child. Money for this tax credit could be obtained from existing health insurance subsidies, like Medicaid and Medicare.

Conclusion

The United States’ healthcare system has not served its people well, especially when looked at in comparison to its peer nations. There are many faults to the current system, including high costs, inefficient practices, and an unwillingness by many to change. In order to effectively provide health care to as many people as possible, more changes need to be made. While the Affordable Care Act was a step in the right direction, the United States is still at the bottom of the list when it comes to effective health care.

 Resources

Commonwealth Fund: How the U.S. Healthcare System Compares Internationally

CNN Money: Healthcare Lobbying Boom Continues

Department for Professional Employees, AFL-CIO: The U.S. Healthcare System: An International Perspective

Forbes: U.S. Health Care Ranked Dead Last Compared to 10 Other Countries

Forbes: Universal Coverage is Not “Single Payer” Healthcare

Forbes: Why We Should Replace Obamacare With a Universal Health Tax Credit

HealthPAC: How Other Countries Do it

Global Post: Eight Places That Do Health Care Better Than the US

Global Post: Special Report: Health Care in Taiwan

Atlantic: Why Do Other Rich Nations Spend So Much Less on Health Care?

Center for Public Integrity: Lobbyists Swarm Capitol to Influence Health Reform

Law Dictionary: How Many Americans Really Do Not Have Health Insurance?

U.S. News & World Report: Obamacare Enrollees, by the Numbers

Valeriya Metla

Valeriya Metla is a young professional, passionate about international relations, immigration issues, and social and criminal justice. She holds two Bachelor Degrees in regional studies and international criminal justice. Contact Valeriya at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post American Health Care: Last Place Among Peer Nations in Latest Study appeared first on Law Street.

Since 1949, China and Taiwan have been considered by various parties either part of a single nation or two distinct countries. In this confusing existing dynamic, Washington has often acted as a go between. The United States has mainly balanced the two actors by maintaining its military dominance and deterring Beijing, while simultaneously boosting Taipei’s defense capabilities. Read on to learn about the history between China and Taiwan, the conflict that separates them, the United States’ role, and the current status.

Origin of the Conflict

It all started with two political parties and one civil war.

Chiang Kai-Shek was the leader of the Kuomintang (KMT) party of Chinese Nationalists. In 1927, he led an exploration to the north of China in the hope of dismantling the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The nationalist KMT almost defeated the CCP altogether, but ten years later Japan, desiring more power leading up to World War II, derailed KMT forces and completely disrupted the Chinese civil war. Japan was fighting both the KMT and the CCP, but the KMT took harder hits.

Upon Japan’s loss in WWII, the United States forced Japan to surrender Chinese land back to the KMT, including the island Japan had taken over. It was called Fermosa, and is the land that later became Taiwan.

Even with the support of the U.S. post-World War II, the KMT had suffered too many casualties against Japan. Using grassroots support, rising leader Mao Zedong strengthened communist ideologies, recruited soldiers from the countryside, and formed the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Eventually with the rallied forces, the CCP took the KMT capital of Nanjing. Finally KMT leadership fled to Taiwan in 1949 and founded the Republic of China (ROC), or Taiwan.

With the KMT off the mainland, Mao Zedong declared the People’s Republic of China (PRC), naming Beijing the capital. Still led by Chiang Kai Shek, the KMT declared Taipei its capital, but still held its claim to mainland China.

The Taiwan Strait Crises and Major Developments

In 1955 when the first Taiwan Strait Crisis took place, the United States sent troops to the strait because it was against the mainland Chinese communist regime taking over Taiwan.

The U.S respected the ROC because of its similarities with the U.S. political regime. At the time, ROC was represented at the United Nations and had a permanent seat on the Security Council. It was during this time that Congress agreed the U.S should provide Taiwan defense and support if Taiwan-China relations ever erupted violently.

But tensions remained high between Taiwain and mainland China. The two groups even came to an arrangement in which they would bomb each other’s garrisons on alternate dates. This continued for 20 years until the United States assisted in creating more normalized relations.

In 1971, the PRC procured the “China” seat at the United Nations through rallied power, replacing Taiwan. The United States declared that it “acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China,” in what is known as the Shanghai Communiqué of 1972. In the communiqué, finding language that both mainland China and the U.S. could accept was crucial to establishing diplomatic relations. The United States agreed that it would henceforth have only “unofficial” relations with Taiwan.

This left the United States with a problem–many believed that the U.S., as the guarantor of peace in Asia, had a moral obligation to provide some protection to Taiwan. To remedy this, Congress in March 1979 passed the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). The TRA declared that it is U.S. policy “to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people of Taiwan.” The TRA also mandated that the United States would sell Taiwan defense items “in such quantity as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability.”

In a subsequent 1982 communiqué, the United States said it intended “gradually to reduce its sale of arms to Taiwan.” The Reagan Administration conveyed to Taiwan “The Six Assurances.” The six assurances were that the United States,

1. Had not set a date for ending arms sales to Taiwan;
2. Had not agreed to consult with Beijing prior to making arms sales to Taiwan;
3. Would not play a mediation role between Taipei and Beijing;
4. Had not agreed to revise the Taiwan Relations Act;
5. Had not altered its position regarding sovereignty of Taiwan; and,
6. Would not exert pressure on Taiwan to negotiate with the PRC.

Washington continues to sell arms to Taiwan over strenuous Chinese objections, and both Washington and Beijing continue to plan for the possibility that they could one day find themselves involved in a military confrontation over Taiwan’s fate.

Current Status of the Conflict

China has repeatedly threatened to invade Taiwan if the island declares independence, encouraging Taiwan to keep improving its forces and conducting regular military drills. To simulate a Chinese air attack, Taiwan’s navy launched its premier surface-to-air missile from the deck of a warship very recently, its first test of the weapon in six years, destroying a drone.

Another point of contention comes from the fact that Taiwan wants a larger role in international organizations exclusively held for nations. Since Taiwan is not its own nation, compromises have sometimes been made to include Taiwanese leaders. Taiwan wants a bigger U.N. role–it lost its seat when the body recognized China in 1971. China was opposed to the U.S. idea that Taiwan be invited to the International Civil Aviation Organization Assembly as an observer; and suggested that Taiwan participate as a guest. That was a great example of a compromise, and a move toward peace.

Currently, China is setting up an organization with a similar format to the World Bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Taiwan requested membership, but the Chinese government will only allow membership under a different name–Chinese Taipei. This is another perfect example of the redundancy and tedious diplomatic ties between China and Taiwan.

Society and Culture in Taiwan 

One of the major changes affecting the balance between China and Taiwan has been the empowerment of the Taiwanese identity. Previously, Taiwanese people considered themselves both Taiwanese and Chinese, but people are starting to exclusively claim Taiwanese as their ethnicity. This is a problem for China, because that means fewer people are in support of Taiwan’s relationship with the mainland. Although many policymakers propose a joint or unified government between mainland China and Taiwan, this is threatened by the development of the Taiwanese identity.

Prospects for Future

America’s sale of arms to Taiwan often triggers a cyclical reaction: Washington and Beijing consistently fight back and forth over these sales before business returns to normal. This approach has worked reasonably well for more than 30 years, despite the occasional flare up in the strait, and has created an expectation that it will continue to be followed. However, there are some concerns about the sustainability of this relationship. China is steadily building up its military, and soon the U.S. may have a harder time matching the sophistication of weapons it sells to Taiwan. China’s ability to retaliate against the United States for arms sales to Taiwan is increasing. So, things may change soon, but for now the status quo appears to be holding relatively strong.

Conclusion

Ultimately the United States’ main interest in the Chinese-Taiwanese relationship appears to be peacekeeping, not peacemaking. In the present dynamic, Washington is a stabilizer, emboldening cross-strait interchange, warning both sides that it will counter any unilateral actions that may risk peace, and deterring Beijing by providing its military predominance, while supporting Taiwan’s security forces. In this complicated three-party relationship, none of that seems likely to change anytime soon.

Resources

Primary

Congressional Research Service: China/Taiwan: Evolution of the “One China” Policy—Key Statements from Washington, Beijing, and Taipei

Congressional Research Service: Democratic Reforms in Taiwan: Issues For Congress

Congressional Research Service: U.S.-Taiwan Relationship: Overview of Policy Issues

Additional

Carnegie Endowment For Peace: China, Taiwan, U.S.: Status Quo Challenged

George Washington University: Balancing Acts: The U.S. Rebalance and Asia-Pacific Stability

Council on Foreign Relations: If Taiwan Declares Independence and China Reacts With Force, on Whom Should the U.S. Lean Harder, China or Taiwan?

BBC News: Taiwan Rejected From China-Led Asia Bank ‘Due to Name’

Brookings Institution: Thoughts on the Taiwan Relations Act 

CSIS: Taiwan’s Quest for Greater Participation in the International Community

Jasmine Shelton

Jasmine Shelton is an American University Alumna, Alabamian at heart, and Washington D.C. city girl for now. She loves hiking, second-hand clothes, and flying far away. Contact Jasmine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post China and Taiwan: A Balancing Act For the United States appeared first on Law Street.