Three Pillars of America’s Taiwan policy? or Maybe Four

As all are aware by now, United States policy toward Taiwan is guided by three canonical texts: the Taiwan Relations Act, the Three Joint Communiques, and the Six Assurances. But the State Department now seems to be working with a fourth document which goes by the bland name of “state telegram number 87604” of June 26, 2007, regarding “UN references to Taiwan.” Long dormant, “07 State 87604” seems to have been rediscovered at State Department headquarters in Foggy Bottom. I doubt it will ever be enshrined with the three holy texts, but it now seems to influence American diplomacy toward Taiwan more than ever before.

眾所周知，美國對台政策是以台灣關係法、美中三公報、以及對台六項保證等三份經典文本為依歸。不過，美國國務院現在似乎正在運用第四份文件，文件的名稱並不起眼，是二○○七年六月廿六日的「國務院第八七六○四號電報」，內容是關於「聯合國關於台灣的措辭」。在塵封已久之後，「○七年國務院第八七六○四號電報」，似乎已經在位於霧谷（Foggy Bottom）的國務院總部被重新發現。我懷疑這份文件是否會與三份被奉為圭臬的經典一起被載入史冊，但它現在對美國對台外交的影響，似乎比以往任何時候都來得大。

I expected some sign of “07 State 87604’s” presence over the past month at the Southeast Asian summits, but saw little. It wasn’t apparent at the mid-November Biden-Xi (習近平) summit at the G20 leaders’ meeting in Bali, Indonesia, although there was something else new; Chinese Communist leaders have begun to declare that Taiwan is not simply “a” core interest but, in fact, that “the Taiwan Question is the core of China’s core interests” (台灣問題是中國核心利益中的核心), the reddest of red lines. Over the past decade or so, Washington has become inured to Beijing’s hyperbole over Taiwan. And as such, it is hard to tell what China’s “core interests” really are.

○七年國務院八七六○四號電報

Indeed, in December 2022, one can see that “Taiwan” cannot possibly be China’s “hardest-core of core-interests.” No, that title must instead, go to “Covid-19.” Otherwise, China’s leadership wouldn’t be sacrificing trillions and trillions of yuan to keep Covid-19 deaths at 3.0 per 1.4 billion people over six months. Yes, that’s right. The news last month was that there were three Covid-19 fatalities in China from May through October 2022 and a total of 595 deaths year-to-date. And those three unfortunate patients were all over 87 years old.

事實上，在二○二二年十二月，我們可以確定，「台灣」不可能是中國「核心利益中的核心」。這個主詞應該換成「Covid-19」。否則，中國的領導階層不會甘於投入數以兆計的人民幣，將十四億人口在六個月內的新冠肺炎死亡率控制在只有三人。是的，沒錯。上個月的報導說，從二○二二年五月到十月，中國只有三起Covid-19死亡病例，今年迄今的死亡病例只有五九五人。而且，那三名不幸的患者都超過八十七歲。

儘管如此，我還是到處搜尋美國對台政策可能從G20峰會相關報導中遺漏的任何新措辭。但我一個也沒找到。中國和俄羅斯都針對G20「領袖聲明」（leaders’ statement）的措辭積極進行遊說，建議結束或至少放寬對俄羅斯糧食、化肥和能源出口的制裁。而為了避免主要出口產品遭到制裁，俄羅斯甚至接受了「譴責」對烏克蘭「發動戰爭」的措辭。因此，在峇里島廿國集團峰會，以及上個月在該地區舉行的其他幾場東南亞國協（ASEAN）和亞太經濟合作會議（APEC）高峰會上，中國外交官並未真正將注意力集中在「台灣問題」上。

I did happen onto something else last week quite by accident. It was a protest by the Chinese delegation at the “19th Conference of Parties” (CoP19) to the UN “CITES” endangered species treaty in Panama from 14-25 November.

不過，上週我卻意外地發現另外一件事。就是中國代表團在十一月十四日至廿五日，於巴拿馬舉行的聯合國「瀕臨絕種野生動植物國際貿易公約」（CITES，簡稱華盛頓公約）第十九屆締約方大會（CoP19）上的抗議。

There, hidden amid vast fields of routine environmental and conservation reports, was “Proposition 10” submitted by the American delegation.

在那裡，美國代表團提出的「第十號提案」（Proposition 10），在卷帙浩繁的例行環境和保育報告中隱而不顯。

I promise this isn’t going to be as boring as it sounds. “Prop 10” was a scholarly proposal to amend the status the short-tailed albatross (Phoebastria albatrus), that nests in “the Senkaku Islands of Japan” and “Agincourt 彭佳嶼 and Pescadore [sic] Islands 澎湖列島 of Taiwan.”

可是，我保證這項提案的內容不會像聽起來那麼無聊。「第十號提案」是一項學術性提案，旨在修正短尾信天翁（phoebastria albatrus）的現況，說牠們在「日本尖閣諸島」和「台灣彭佳嶼和澎湖列島」築巢。

Moreover, the US delegation’s “Prop 10” twice footnoted “Taiwan’s National Plan of Action for Reducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries” and included “Taiwan” in a list of “countries” with active management plans — between “Japan” and “United States.”

而且，美國代表團的「第十號提案」還兩度在註腳中引述「台灣減少延繩釣漁業意外捕獲海鳥之國家行動計畫」（Taiwan’s National Plan of Action for Reducing Incidental Catch of Seabirds in Longline Fisheries），並將「台灣」列入有積極管理計畫的「國家」名單—介於「日本」和「美國」之間。

CoP19大會 美將台灣列入國家名單

It is unknown if the US delegation scientists ran their draft by the State Department. State Department officers were members of the American CoP19 delegation. And the US has had a clear mandate to support Taiwan in international organizations. Indeed, last year, on the fiftieth anniversary of Taiwan’s expulsion from the United Nations, October 25, 2021, Secretary of State Antony Blinken formally urged other UN member states to support “Taiwan’s robust, meaningful participation throughout the UN system and in the international community.” The State Department spokesman was questioned intensively on October 26th about the “meaning” of the term “meaningful participation”: does it mean “participation separate from Beijing”? The spokesman, on camera, seemed to smile as if gratified that this secret State Department policy had been deciphered without necessitating his formal explication of its mystical arcana.

不知道美國代表團的科學家是否曾諮詢過國務院，對他們的提案草稿有何意見。國務院官員也是美國CoP19大會代表團的成員。而且，美國有明確的指令，要求在國際組織中支持台灣。事實上，去年在台灣被逐出聯合國五十週年（二○二一年十月廿五日）之際，美國國務卿布林肯（Antony Blinken）正式敦促聯合國其他會員國，支持「台灣積極、有意義參與聯合國體系及國際組織。」 十月廿六日，美國國務院發言人被追問「有意義參與」一詞的「意義」：是指「獨立於北京之外的參與」嗎？面對鏡頭，發言人似乎在微笑，好像很高興國務院的這項秘密政策被破譯了，不需要他再花時間對其神秘奧義提出正式說明。

Back at CoP19, the Chinese delegation demanded that the following statement be included in the record:

“The US proposals have a large number of incorrect descriptions that list Taiwan as a country and fail to correctly indicate that Taiwan Province is part of China. What US [sic] has done violates the US government’s repeatedly declared position of adhering to the ‘One China’ principle [sic] and constitutes a gross violation of China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

This, China said, “violates international law,” citing neither chapter nor verse to support the claim.

回到CoP19大會，中國代表團要求將以下聲明寫入會議紀錄：

「美方的提案充斥大量錯誤描述，將台灣列為一個國家，沒有正確指出台灣省是中國的一部分。美方的所作所為，違反了美國政府反覆重申的堅持『一個中國』原則的立場，嚴重侵犯了中國的主權和領土完整。」

中國聲稱，美方此舉「違反國際法」，卻未引用任何章節或條文來支持自己的主張。

Nonetheless, this episode at the CITES CoP19 meeting in Panama indicated a new overtness in the US approach to Taiwan in international organizations. Listing “Taiwan” under “countries”; citing two island groups as belonging to “Taiwan”; footnoting a “Taiwan National Plan of Action,” all indicate that the State Department has rediscovered a stern US protest to the United Nations Secretary General from long ago in the George W. Bush administration.

然而，在巴拿馬CITES第十九屆締約方大會上的這一幕表明，美國在國際組織中對台灣的態度出現新的趨向。將「台灣」列為「國家」；將兩個島群引述為屬於「台灣」；以「台灣國家行動計畫」做為註腳，這一切都表明，國務院已經重新發現美國在多年前布希（George W. Bush）政府時期對聯合國秘書長的嚴厲抗議。

美對台新趨向 重新發現○七年電報

On March 28, 2007, the new Secretary General of the United Nations, Ban Ki Moon, dispatched a formal letter to the Nauru representative to the UN. The Secretary General would “like to draw the attention” of the Nauru ambassador “to General Assembly resolution 2758 (XXVI) of 25 October 1971. In that resolution, the General Assembly decided “to recognize the representatives of the People’s Republic of China as the only legitimate representative of China to the United Nations.” In accordance with that resolution, the United Nations considered Taiwan for all purposes to be an integral part of the People’s Republic of China. It was wording crafted, no doubt, in Beijing. This verbiage eventually found its way to the Secretary of State.

二○○七年三月廿八日，新任聯合國秘書長潘基文向諾魯駐聯合國代表發出一封正式信函。內容是秘書長「謹提請」諾魯大使注意「聯合國大會第廿六屆會議一九七一年十月廿五日通過的第二七五八號決議。在該決議中，大會決定『承認中華人民共和國政府的代表是中國在聯合國組織的唯一合法代表。』 根據這項決議，聯合國認為，無論在哪一方面，台灣都是中華人民共和國不可分割的一部分。」毫無疑問，這是在北京精心炮製的措辭。這些讕言最終傳到美國國務卿的耳朵裡。

The wheels of diplomacy grind exceedingly fine and after three months there was action. On June 26, 2007, Secretary Condoleezza Rice dispatched telegram 07 State 87604 to US acting permanent representative at USUN mission, Alejandro Wolff, with orders to clarify US policy regarding Taiwan and to demand that the United Nations Secretariat refrain from taking sides in politically-charged debates about Taiwan. The demarche was not lengthy but its legal argumentation was nuanced. Ambassador Wolff presented the United States’ protest to the UN undersecretary general for political affairs, which stated, inter alia, “there is no mention in Resolution 2758 of China’s claim of sovereignty over Taiwan.” The demarche concluded by warning, “if the UN Secretariat insists on describing Taiwan as ‘a part of the PRC,’ or on using nomenclature for Taiwan that implies such status, the United States will be obliged to disassociate itself on a national basis from such position.”

外交上的禮尚往來總是來得特別快 慢，美國在三個月後就有了行動。二○○七年六月廿六日，美國國務卿萊斯（Condoleezza Rice）向美國駐聯合國代表團代理常駐代表沃爾夫（Alejandro Wolff），發出○七年國務院第八七六○四號電報，下令澄清美國對台灣的政策，並要求聯合國秘書處在有關台灣的政治性辯論中，不要偏袒任何一方。這份訓令的方針言簡意賅，但其法律論證細緻入微。沃爾夫大使向聯合國負責政治事務的副秘書長提出美國的抗議，其中特別指出，「第二七五八號決議並未提及中國對台灣的主權主張。」這項立場聲明最後警告說，「如果聯合國秘書處堅持描述台灣為『中華人民共和國的一部分』，或對台灣使用隱含此喻意的名稱，美國將在一個國家的基礎上不得不和此立場撇清關係。」

In 2007, this language marked a startling turn in Taiwan’s international status. For the first time in a quarter century, the United States Department of State was obliged to reiterate its “long standing” position that the United States has “not formally recognized Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan and [has] not made any determination as to Taiwan’s political status.”

在二○○七年，這句話標誌著台灣國際地位的一個驚人轉變。四分之一個世紀以來，美國國務院首次不得不重申其「長期一貫」立場，即美國「並未正式承認中國對台灣的主權，也沒有對台灣的政治地位做出任何決定。」

On August 13, 2007, Secretary General Ban met with US Permanent Representative Zalmay Khalilzad to discuss “the issue of UN language on the status of Taiwan, Ban said he realized he had gone too far in his recent public statements, and confirmed that the UN would no longer use the phrase ‘Taiwan is a part of China’.”

二○○七年八月十三日，聯合國秘書長潘基文會見美國常駐聯合國代表哈里札德（Zalmay Khalilzad），討論「聯合國關於台灣地位的措辭問題」。潘基文表示，他意識到他最近的公開言論太過分，並確認聯合國將不再使用「台灣是中國的一部分」這種說法。

○七年電報撇清 「台灣是中國一部分」

But that was 15 years ago. Telegram 07 State 87604 now has an entirely new influence on US policy regarding Taiwan in international organizations. State Department spokesman Ned Price said September 26, 2022, that “our ‘one China’ policy has not changed, we don’t take a position on sovereignty [over Taiwan], but the policy that has been at the crux of our approach to Taiwan since 1979 remains in effect today.”

不過，那已經是十五年前的往事了。現在，○七年國務院第八七六○四號電報，在國際組織中對美國對台政策有了全新的影響。國務院發言人普萊斯（Ned Price）在二○二二年九月廿六日表示，「我們的『一個中國』政策沒有改變，我們對（台灣）主權並未採取立場，這項政策自一九七九年以來做為美國對台政策的核心，目前依然有效。」

The strong language of Telegram 07 State 87604 that “if the UN Secretariat insists on describing Taiwan as ‘a part of the PRC’ … the United States will be obliged to disassociate itself on a national basis from such position” presumably remains on the State Department’s books. It clearly is something that has to be said, and it guided the CoP19 “Prop 10” submission. The United States ought not to be shy about rolling it out as often as needed.

○七年國務院第八七六○四號電報的強硬措辭，「如果聯合國秘書處堅持描述台灣為『中華人民共和國的一部分』…美國將在一個國家的基礎上不得不和此立場撇清關係」，應該還保留在國務院的檔案紀錄上。國務院顯然必須對台灣的國際地位表態，它指引了美國代表團在CoP19大會上提出「第十號提案」。只要有此需要，美國就應該勇於做出澄清。

John J. Tkacik, Jr. is a retired US foreign service officer who has served in Taipei and Beijing and is now director of the Future Asia Project at the International Assessment and Strategy Center.