U.S.-China Summit Has Taiwan Jittery

You might think China would be satisfied merely to have President Clinton show up in Beijing next month. You’d think China’s leaders would find it enough to have the president show his respect to them by attending formal welcoming ceremonies in Tiananmen Square.

But no. China is looking for more.

Over the last few weeks, China has been pressing extremely hard, behind the scenes, for Clinton to make new American concessions concerning Taiwan and its 21 million people during the upcoming summit.

In particular, Chinese negotiators have been urging the Clinton administration to put into writing a series of detailed commitments about the future of the island, which China considers to be part of its own territory.

Beijing wants the United States to sign a statement, together with China, that will formally enshrine what are commonly called the “three nos”--that the United States will not support Taiwan’s independence, Taiwan’s admission to the United Nations or a policy of recognizing two separate Chinas.

Chinese officials have been making other requests as well. China would like the administration to pledge in writing not to install a theater-missile defense system on Taiwan. And Chinese officials have sought new promises that the United States will restrict arms sales to the island.

Taiwan is especially worried by China’s campaign. If Clinton were to give these written assurances at the summit, “it could hurt Taiwan,” maintains Koo Chen-fu, a senior Taiwan official who is chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation, the organization responsible for dealing with the mainland.

Koo said in an interview last week that he hopes Clinton’s summit in Beijing will be successful and that he welcomes improved relations between the United States and China. However, he cautioned, “our only concern is that Taiwan’s interests are taken into account.”

Chinese officials have pushed for the new commitments on Taiwan for several weeks, during talks about what will happen at the summit.

China has been making the argument that what it seeks would really be nothing new. After all, note Chinese officials, the Clinton administration has already said that it has a one-China policy, and that it does not support Taiwan’s independence or its admission to the United Nations.

Only last week, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Susan Shirk affirmed this policy in testimony to the House International Relations Committee. She was only repeating what others in the administration have said in public in the past, and what Clinton himself has privately told Chinese leaders.

And so, Chinese officials ask, why not just put these promises into writing?

U.S. officials counter that a written statement about Taiwan would be much more formal and permanent than anything the Clinton administration has said in the past.

Moreover, say some administration officials, it is one thing for the United States to explain, unilaterally, its policy concerning Taiwan. It would be something else for the United States to be trying to determine the future of the island (which is, after all, a thriving democracy) in a joint statement with China.

Koo, who is a senior advisor to Taiwan President Lee Teng-hui, warned that there would be political fallout on Taiwan too. If Clinton made new written promises about Taiwan during the summit, he said, the result would be to “put fire into the Taiwan independence movement.”

Taiwan’s ruling Nationalist Party still formally adheres to the notion that the island is part of China--although it says reunification should be put off until some time far in the future when China is democratic. Its political opposition, the Democratic Progressive Party, believes Taiwan should be independent of China.

Over the last week, administration officials have tried to reassure Taiwan not to worry so much about the Beijing summit. But what they have said so far seems vague and carefully worded.

U.S. officials have said Clinton will not sign any new “communique” concerning Taiwan. That word carries special meaning in American relations with China. The United States signed three formal communiques with China--in 1972, 1978 and 1982--that set the boundaries for past American policy concerning Taiwan.

“There will be no fourth communique on Taiwan arms sales or Taiwan issues at the summit,” Shirk testified in Congress last week.

Nevertheless, this promise seems to leave open the possibility that something could be put into writing that, in deference to Taiwan’s sensitivities, would not be called a “communique.” Indeed, when Clinton met with Chinese President Jiang Zemin in Washington last October, the two governments issued a written document that was called a “joint statement.”

Taiwan is still jittery. In Washington last week, Koo argued that Chinese officials will put their own interpretation on whatever Clinton signs. “They will not regard the fact that it’s not a communique as less binding,” he noted.

During Clinton’s trip, many Americans will focus on the symbolism of the visit. What will Clinton do in Tiananmen Square, where nearly 1 million people demonstrated for democracy in 1989 before Chinese troops were called into the city?

But the ceremonies are only part of the summit. Watch out for any agreements Clinton signs and any commitments he makes in writing. Taiwan certainly will.

Jim Mann’s column appears in this space every Wednesday.