Clinton's visit to China an affront to Japan and Taiwan

By Edward Neilan

'Rule of law' emphasis is subtle U.S. policy switch in Asia from 'rule of democracy'.

TOKYO (JP): The China odyssey of U.S. President Bill Clinton scheduled for late June will be a painful spectacle for two of the most loyal--though most unlikely--allies which Washington has ever had.

Tokyo and Taipei, where the governments of Japan and the Republic of China on Taiwan, respectively, reside, will be bypassed on the trip at China's insistence.

Take note first of all, that Japan and Taiwan are two of Asia's most prospering economies and two of the region's most exemplary democracies. Japan is in a class by itself in both instances but including Taiwan in the argument is instructive. Japan, after all, must be seen to share credit with the U.S. for contributing to Taiwan's basic economic development in this century.

Japan is the defeated enemy of World War II which rose from the ashes to become the globe's number two economy, a leading student of democracy and, according to some like former U.S. Senate Majority Leader and Ambassador to Japan Mike Mansfield, America's "most important partner."

Washington has trouble treating Tokyo as an equal even though the Japanese have competed with excellence and cooperated with many U.S. projects which were unpopular among Japanese, the Vietnam War being a main example.

At a time when the U.S. needs Japanese cooperation in keeping the world economy on track, the bypassing of Japan by Clinton is seen as an expedient affront to please China. It is at worst a policy miscalculation and at least a loss of face for the sensitive Japanese.

When Communists of Mao Zedong defeated Nationalists of Chiang Kai-shek in 1949, remnants of the latter fled to Taiwan.

For Taiwan, which Beijing regards as a renegade province, there never was any question of a Clinton stopover. He has been there previously on a couple of occasions to drum up business as Governor of Arkansas.

U.S. ties with Taiwan today are non-diplomatic, but held on by the Taiwan Relations Act and relations with China defined by three executive branch communiques starting with the Shanghai Communique of 1973. Visits to Taiwan by high-ranking current U.S. officials are extremely rare, but former officials come in droves.

When Taiwan President Lee Teng-hui was allowed a visa to visit his Cornell University alumni reunion in 1995, China reacted with extreme paranoia, launched missiles near Taiwan and created a crisis that only quieted when two U.S aircraft carriers were dispatched to the Taiwan Strait.

Intense lobbying is going on at this moment:

* By China, to get the (U.S. to agree to Clinton's signing on the trip a "fourth communique" unequivocally stating that the U.S. supports "One China" and that Taiwan is part of China.

* By Taiwan, to have the U.S. refrain from signing any such communique.

* By the United States, to get China to release as many dissidents as possible before the visit to demonstrate that Washington pressure to get China to follow the rule of law is working. Also, by the U.S., whispering in the ear of Taiwan's ruling Kuomintang Party (KMT) not to make provocative statements about the visit and in the ear of Taiwan's opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) not to make noises about an independence referendum if it should win the presidency in 2000.

* By Japan, to get the U.S. to agree to a Clinton stopover in Tokyo after his China visit. There is room for maneuver here, since Jiang Zemin has a scheduled visit to Tokyo in the fall. One proposal by Tokyo under consideration at the White House: Japanese Prime Minister Hashimoto would visit Clinton during a Hawaii vacation after the China trip. Since it would be on U.S. soil, the pledge to China about no stopovers would be met.

Some analysts are concerned about the shift of U.S. China policy from "drift" to that of emphasis on the rule of law. They see this at the expense of an emphasis on promoting democracy, which was the U.S. hallmark in Asia in years gone by.

Promoting the rule of law can mean that China consultants like Henry Kissinger and Alexander Haig would be certain to collect their fees, Boeing would be paid for its aircraft sales, and dozens of American lawyers would be paid for business contracts and consulting.

It is also likely to strengthen the rule of the Communist Party rather than encouraging development of democratic diversity as already seen on Taiwan. Legalists say the U.S. has no "moral" debt to Taiwan and that its 21 million people should go quietly to China rule without a referendum.

There are ample arguments opposing that view.

In their new book The First Chinese Democracy: Political Life in the Republic of China on Taiwan by Linda Chao and Ramon H. Myers (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London, 1998, US$45) the authors chart with cool academic precision the dramatic political transformation of Taiwan from an authoritarian regime based on martial law into a democracy. The transformation was encouraged at every step of the way by the United States.

It should be U.S. policy and Clinton's mission to likewise encourage democracy in China as well as promoting bright bottom- line business deals. As for Taiwan, democracy there should be allowed to speak for itself about the people's future.

No more "handovers" like Hong Kong.

The writer is a veteran Tokyo-based analyst of Northeast Asia affairs and a Media Fellow at Hoover Institution, Stanford University.