I noticed last week that Bush was taking a clear and definitive stand in support of the nation’s long-standing “One China” policy and the Chinese policy on Taiwan. I wasn’t particularly troubled by the announcement; it’s not much different from the Clinton administration’s policy.
Bush was, however, stronger than usual in encouraging (warning?) Taiwan not to host a referendum on demands against China, which, of course, Beijing vehemently opposes because it regards the vote as a significant step toward Taiwan eventually declaring independence.
Standing next to Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao last week on the White House’s South Lawn, Bush said the United States opposes “any unilateral decision by either China or Taiwan to change the status quo.” The president added, “And the comments and actions made by the leader of Taiwan indicate that he may be willing to make decisions unilaterally to change the status quo, which we oppose.”
Bush was so unambiguous in his opposition to the Taiwanese referendum, the Chinese government even offered a rare public “thank you” to the Bush administration after Wen returned from his visit.
It’s not hard to see why the Chinese would be so pleased. Bush appeared to go out of his way to discourage Taiwanese elections while simultaneously extolling Chinese cooperation with the U.S. on working with us on terrorist threats, saying that our two nations are “working together in the war on terror” and “fighting to defeat a ruthless enemy.”
In laudatory language Bush usually reserves for the British, he called the United States and China “partners in diplomacy working to meet the dangers of the 21st century.”
So far, so good, right? Sure, Bush has done wonders in alienating a number of traditional U.S. allies, but here he was, just last week, being about as nice to China as he possibly could be. He’s quite the uniter, you know. There was just one problem.
After watching Bush and Wen get along so well, I thought it was kind of a shame to consider the criticisms of one presidential candidate, with absolutely no foreign policy experience, demand that the U.S. not placate the Chinese and insist that our government remind China that we will protect Taiwan’s drive for independence, with force if necessary. This candidate was particularly irked by the president’s use of the word “partner” to describe China, which he believes should be referred to as a “competitor.”
Who was this presidential candidate whose opinions are so at odds with the Bush administration’s policy? It was Gov. George W. Bush — in 1999.
As his presidential campaign was getting underway in August 1999, Bush wanted to make it clear that he wasn’t satisfied with Clinton’s policy towards China. In an interview on CNN, Bush said Clinton had “made a mistake [in] calling China a strategic partner” and “sent bad signals” to Beijing about U.S. policy toward Taiwan.
“We need to be tough and firm” in the face of Chinese threats to use force if necessary to prevent Taiwan from declaring itself independent, Bush said. He added that China should be viewed as a “strategic competitor,” not a “strategic partner.”
Asked whether protecting Taiwan might require the use of U.S. troops, Bush said, “It could. We need to honor our commitments in the Far East.”
A few years of on-the-job training makes a big difference.