LEGISLATION INTRODUCED IN HOUSE SEEKING SENATE CONFIRMATION OF AIT DIRECTOR

眾議院提案要求美國在台協會處長之任命須經參議院同意

Photo Credit: Wally Gobetz (Flickr)

The post Legislation Introduced in House Seeking Senate Confirmation of AIT Director appeared first on Formosan Association for Public Affairs.

On Aug. 11, the New York Times crossword puzzle had a particularly easy clue for 18 across: “Most populous nation not in the UN.” The answer? Taiwan, of course. So, no wonder most of my fellow Americans are surprised to hear that the US and Taiwan, despite our long-standing and close alliance, do not have diplomatic relations.

The fact that the US Senate does not confirm the US’ top diplomat to Taiwan, as it does for all other countries, comes as a surprise as well. After all, US law recognizes Taiwan as an independent, sovereign country with its own territory, government and population.

Yet, without strong US backing for Asia’s freest democracy, China’s anaconda strategy in world diplomacy will fatally strangle Taiwan’s international space.

The Formosan Association for Public Affairs fears Taiwan might not be receiving the vital recognition and respect in Washington that the country needs to survive as a US partner in democratic Asia.

It therefore urges the legislature to reimpose the constitutional requirement for Senate advice and consent in the US president’s appointment of the director of the American Institution in Taiwan (AIT).

Article II, Section 2, of the constitution says that the president “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for.”

The 1979 US Taiwan Relations Act, signed by then-US president Jimmy Carter on April 10, 1979, mandates that committees of the US Congress shall monitor the “operation and procedures” of the AIT.

The AIT’s Web site only admits that the US Department of State provides a “large part” of its funding “and guidance in its operations.”

Truth be told, the US secretary of state is the sole source of the AIT’s money, and is the sole selector of AIT’s “director” — the exact equivalent of an ambassador in every respect.

The AIT director supervises a large multiagency US mission with foreign service officers from the US departments of agriculture, commerce, defense and others, as well as the state department, exactly as a chief of mission would in any other US embassy.

The AIT’s Taipei office has also had a “consular section,” staffed with active-duty US consuls and vice consuls for several years.

Allowing the secretary of state to self-advise and self-consent, and then self-appoint the nation’s ambassador to Taiwan, arguably, is an unconstitutional delegation of the Senate’s legislative power to the US executive branch.

It seems indefensible for the executive branch to pretend that an official mission to a foreign country such as the AIT, staffed exclusively by executive branch officers, funded exclusively from the US Department of the Treasury, and operating solely at the direction of the secretary of state, is not an embassy.

It is also disingenuous in the extreme to say that the chief of that mission is not an ambassador, or a public minister or a consul, or even an “officer of the United States whose appointments are not … otherwise provided for” in the constitution.

To this day, the official nature of high-level US-Taiwan interactions has remained unchanged. However, some recent moves on the US side bode well for a more normal bilateral relationship.

In May, the Coordination Council for North American Affairs, the Taiwanese counterpart of the AIT, was renamed less ambiguously the Taiwan Council for US Affairs.

In the Indo-Pacific Strategy Report published by the US Department of Defense in June, Taiwan is referred to as one of the four “countries” that are reliable, capable and natural partners of the US.

In a speech at the Heritage Foundation in late June, US Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs Randall Schriver made it clear that the US is going to treat Taiwan as a “normal security systems partner.”

There is ample precedent of a US ambassador being sent to Taiwan after Senate confirmation. From 1949 to 1979, six US ambassadors to the “Republic of China” (ROC) were confirmed by the Senate. Leonard Unger, the last one among the six, was confirmed after a Senate hearing in 1974.

When this hearing took place, the US recognized the ROC, rather than the People’s Republic of China, as the only representative of China. However, the questions for Unger were mostly about the Taiwan-US alliance, bilateral economic relations and Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) health.

If Senate confirmation of a US ambassador to Taiwan was indispensable in the face of the threat from communist China during the Cold War, more than ever, it is in the critical national interest of the US now to restore such procedure amid escalating US-China competition.

The absence of Senate confirmation of the AIT director is a side effect of cutting US diplomatic ties with the ROC. This should not be taken for granted, though.

Indeed, while Washington no longer recognized Taipei as the capital of “China,” Carter directed that the entire US government continue to treat “Taiwan” as it did all other “foreign countries, nations, states, governments or similar entities.”

The Taiwan Relations Act then defined “Taiwan” as “the islands of Taiwan and the Pescadores, the people on those islands … and the governing authorities on Taiwan recognized by the United States as the ‘Republic of China’ prior to Jan. 1, 1979, and any successor governing authorities.”

Therefore, in law, the US recognizes Taiwan as a foreign nation state, with a defined territory and population, and a government that used to be called the “Republic of China,” but which might change that name in the future.

Simply calling the American mission in Taipei “AIT” does not alter the legal fact that it is an embassy, and the chief of its mission is an “officer of the United States whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for.”

On Feb. 23, 1979, then-US secretary of state Cyrus Vance wrote a letter to then-US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations chairman Frank Church on the accountability of the proposed AIT.

In the letter, Vance said that it would not be appropriate for the Senate to advise and consent to the appointment of trustees or officers of the AIT due to the unofficial nature of the institute.

However, Vance also pledged that names of the prospective trustees and officers would be forwarded to the committee.

If the committee would express reservations about these nominations, the state department, according to Vance, would “undertake to discuss and resolve the matter fully with the committee before proceeding.”

However, such a promise has yet to be fulfilled.

Recent legislation highlights Taiwan as an indispensable ally to the US regardless of the change of administrations.

The “six assurances” resolutions passed by former US president Barack Obama’s administration, the Taiwan Travel Act and the Asia Reassurance Initiative Act that US President Donald Trump signed into law, and the National Defense Authorization acts of past years all reflect the pivotal role Taiwan plays in Washington’s Indo-Pacific policies.

Facing growing Chinese diplomatic assertiveness and military aggressiveness against Taiwan, the Senate should retake its central role in selecting the US’ top diplomat in Taiwan.

This article is first published in Taipei Times (2019/9/27)

The post US should confirm the AIT director appeared first on Formosan Association for Public Affairs.

FAPA Applauds Unanimous Passage Of Taiwan Policy Act In House Foreign Affairs Committee

On August 1, 2013 the Foreign Affairs Committee of the United States House of Representatives unanimously passed HR419 aka the Taiwan Policy Act (TPA).

The TPA was introduced on January 25, 2013 by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) and co-chairs of the Congressional Taiwan Caucus Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL), Gerald Connolly (D-VA), John Carter (R-TX) and Albio Sires (D-NJ) “to strengthen and clarify the commercial, cultural, and other relations between the people of the United States and the people of Taiwan.”

The TPA was then passed unanimously on April 25 2013 by the House Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific.

It is a comprehensive bill that addresses over a dozen different aspects of the U.S.-Taiwan relationship, and updates the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) to reflect the new realities in the U.S.-Taiwan relationship. The TPA builds on the TRA (which has functioned effectively as the cornerstone of US-Taiwan relations over the past three decades). It does not amend or supersede the TRA.

The TPA had been introduced during the previous 112th Congress, and was subsequently passed by the House Foreign Affairs Committee, but had not made it to the floor by the time Congress adjourned for the year in the fall of 2012.

At the hearing, Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R-CA) lauded the close U.S.-Taiwan relationship and emphasized the Free Trade Agreement provision in the bill.

Introducer of the bill, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) said: “Taiwan is an important friend and ally of the United States, and should be treated as such.”

Taiwan Caucus co-chair Gerry Connolly (D-VA) emphasized that “The U.S. needs to be clear in the actions it takes in Taiwan’s defense, and make it known that the future of Taiwan needs to be resolved peacefully.”

Rep. Matt Salmon (R-AZ) who was a missionary in the Taiwan in the mid-seventies said that, after Israel, he considered Taiwan the strongest ally of the US and that “Taiwan is such a strong democracy that the U.S. should preserve such a strong ally.”

Asian Subcommittee Chairman Steve Chabot (R-OH) repeated his plea that the “Chen Shui-bian issue will be resolved soon.”

FAPA President Mark Kao, Ph.D. says: “With the ever-expanding territorial ambitions of China, the U.S.-Taiwan alliance becomes more and more important. The TPA addresses that concern. Overall, the TPA is one of the most significant Taiwan bills over the past decades and, if enacted into law, will greatly bolster Taiwan’s ability to preserve its freedom and independence.”

Dr. Kao concludes: “The next hurdle for the bill is passage on the floor of the House to be followed by introduction in the Senate where the bill has to follow a similar path. We at FAPA will mobilize all our members all over the United States to help ensure that this critically important bill becomes law at the earliest opportunity.”

台灣人公共事務會讚許美國眾議院外交事務委員會無異議通過「台灣政策法」

美國眾議院外交事務委員會於8月1日無異議通過編號H.R.419的「台灣政策法」（Taiwan Policy Act, TPA）。

台灣政策法於1月25日由佛州共和黨眾議員羅斯雷提能（Ileana Ros-Lehtinen）及眾院台灣連線四位共同主席：佛州共和黨議員迪亞茲巴拉特（Mario Diaz-Balart）、維州民主黨議員康納利（Gerald Connolly）、德州共和黨議員卡特（John Carter），以及紐澤西州民主黨議員席瑞斯（Albio Sires），共同提出。

台灣政策法於4月25日經眾議院亞太事務小組委員會無異議通過。

該法案包括台美關係中十幾項不同的議題，並更新1979年的「台灣關係法」（Taiwan Relations Act, TRA），使其更能反映台美關係的真實現況。台灣政策法是建基於過去三十年來台美關係的重要基石「台灣關係法」上，但並未修改，也不會凌駕於其上。

「台灣政策法」曾在第112屆美國國會中被提出，並通過外交事務委員會審查，但截至該屆國會於2012年秋天散會之前，該項法案並未送交眾院表決。

聽證會中，外交事務委員會主席、加州共和黨眾議員羅伊斯（Ed Royce）讚揚台灣與美國深厚的關係，並強調了TPA中關於自由貿易協定的部分。

TPA提案人、佛州共和黨眾議員羅斯雷提能（Illeana Ros-Lehtinen）表示：「台灣是美國重要的盟友，也應該被如是對待。」

眾院台灣連線共同主席、維州民主黨眾議員康納利（Gerry Connolly）強調：「美國必須對台灣的防禦有明確的作為，並清楚表達台灣的未來必須要和平解決。」

70年代中期，曾以傳教士身分赴台的亞歷桑納州共和黨眾議員邵建隆（Matt Salmon）表示他認為台灣是美國僅次於以色列的盟友。邵建隆並說：「台灣是一個民主國家，而美國必須要持續維護這樣一個盟友。」

亞太事務小組委員會主席，俄亥俄州共和黨眾議員夏波（Steven Chabot）則再次重申他的請求：「讓陳水扁總統的議題早日獲得解決。」

台灣人公共事務會會長高龍榮博士表示：「當中國區域擴張的野心日益加遽時，台美的盟友關係就更為重要，而台灣政策法非常強調台美關係。整體而言，台灣政策法是過去十年中最重要的台灣法案。若此法案通過，將更加保障台灣在國際社會的自由空間。」

高博士總結道：「下一個挑戰是要讓台灣政策法通過眾議院院會表決，然後送到參議院提案，並通過相似的流程。台灣人公共事務會將動員全美會員，務必確保此一重要法案盡早完成立法。」

Photo Credit: CSUF Photos (Flickr)

The post FAPA Applauds Unanimous Passage Of Taiwan Policy Act In House Foreign Affairs Committee appeared first on Formosan Association for Public Affairs.