Ambassador Raymond Greene正在積極.公開.還算有效地展現 "美國政府對台灣主權的政治監護",他與台灣人的境內外敵對勢力的鬥爭,至今為止,已取得局部的勝利
david chou
"谷立言對台灣政治及台海兩岸關係，瞭解深入，常有旁觀者清的觀察。近月來在受訪及公開講話中，頗多剴切之言，其犖犖大者至少有幾項。基本上，台灣七成民眾支持維持現狀，政黨立場未必南轅北轍，都支持維持嚇阻力量和進行對話，最大差異在對台海兩岸互動程度看法不同。(In an interview with United Daily News on June 23, Greene said that ----------- and that the positions of Taiwan’s political parties are also not as polarized as they might appear. The parties all support maintaining deterrence against China while pursuing cross-strait dialogue, with their chief difference being just how far such a dialogue should go.)"
Ambassador Greene "[台灣的]政黨立場未必南轅北轍，都支持維持嚇阻力量和進行對話，最大差異在對台海兩岸互動程度看法不同" 這項認知.判斷.評論應屬外交語言, 倘若不是, 那就是嚴重的誤判.
[to be continued]
David ChouFounderFormosa Statehood Movement(an organization advocating Taiwan's political association with the United States)
============================
Appendix I
自由時報社論》谷立言戴不起的帽子
https://talk.ltn.com.tw/article/paper/1762525
[谷立言是美國政府依《台灣關係法》派駐我國的最高外交使節，代表美國，為台美利益的一切作為，基於事實所做的評斷，專業而正當。（資料照）]
對許多台灣人來說，美國在台協會（AIT）處長谷立言（Raymond Greene）是勤奮而極稱職的外交官，不僅他身為台灣女婿，過節走訪市場買年貨，與攤商、民眾互動，喝珍奶、吃刈包，融入台灣庶民生活；還常與台灣各黨派與民間團體互動，瞭解社會脈動，直球對決疑美論，強調美國力挺台灣政策，積極推動台美無人機等經濟產業合作，展現對台灣的支持與誠意。谷立言三十年外交官生涯，國安會與國務院之外，曾駐節台灣、中國、日本、菲律賓，堪稱東亞事務專家；有如曾任AIT處長的司徒文（William Stanton）所稱道，谷立言相當專業，在外交圈備受推崇。
谷立言對台灣政治及台海兩岸關係，瞭解深入，常有旁觀者清的觀察。近月來在受訪及公開講話中，頗多剴切之言，其犖犖大者至少有幾項。基本上，台灣七成民眾支持維持現狀，政黨立場未必南轅北轍，都支持維持嚇阻力量和進行對話，最大差異在對台海兩岸互動程度看法不同。同時，兩岸十年前相互吸引的條件已消失，北京要求對話須先滿足前提條件，且在台灣社會製造分裂，但不會得其所願，應與台灣民選領袖直接對話。五月川習會後美國對台灣政策不變，且重視「打造台灣為無人機蜂巢」等方式，以不對稱戰力重建台海軍事平衡。.
谷立言這些發言，展現對台灣政治、台海兩岸關係的評析與期盼，重申美方立場，堪稱中規中矩。不過，與台灣人民福祉一向站對立面的中國，對谷立言卻很「感冒」，最近尤強詞奪理，兩度由國台辦發言系統公開抨擊。
先是本月初指谷立言在台灣問題製造雜音，維持現狀是包裝的政治語言，美中元首會晤已達共識，美方官員卻言行不一，陽奉陰違。上週再為谷立言戴上「太上皇」的帽子，指他對台灣政局「說三道四」，散布「無前提對話」、「豪豬」等論調，炮製「蜂巢」概念，施壓立法院通過《國防特別預算條例》，鼓吹提升不對稱戰力，為台獨分裂勢力「遞刀子」，煽動兩岸對抗，把台灣變「火藥桶」、「地雷島」；谷立言違背了川普總統的「嚴肅表態」，破壞台海和平穩定，企圖把美中及兩岸關係推向險境。
中國官方氣急敗壞，嚴厲批鬥谷立言的陽謀顯未得逞。美國國務院旋即表示，中方指控毫無根據，谷立言完全代表美國政府立場；美國對台灣政策並未改變，有如國務卿魯比歐所強調，美國政策以《台灣關係法》、〈美中三公報〉及〈六項保證〉為指引；美國支持台灣獲取關鍵防衛能力，且持續敦促北京停止對台灣施壓，應「轉而與台灣民選當局在不設前提的情況，進行有意義對話」。
對谷立言的敵視與批判，凸顯了中國一貫伎倆。本質上，中國企圖把谷立言與其上司魯比歐、川普對立起來，並把川普沒說過的話塞進他嘴裡，宣稱川普已就台灣獨立及軍售問題「嚴肅表態」。這一話術，慣見美中高層歷次會談後中方發佈紀錄或新聞稿，常把己方片面之詞搞得言之鑿鑿，只是假的真不了，屢遭拆穿。這次譴責谷立言，老狗變不出新把戲，再次演出，當然無以得逞。
必須強調，谷立言是美國政府依《台灣關係法》派駐我國的最高外交使節，代表美國，為台美利益的一切作為，基於事實所做的評斷，專業而正當。有如國人所見，對第一島鏈安全防衛頗有專業的谷立言，曾公開講述中國侵犯台灣的可能方案，強調嚇阻、不對稱作戰。近數月來，他積極與台灣朝野政黨及民間團體互動，安排政治大咖前往美國實地考察，促成美台政經良性互動。相形之下，台灣與中國互不隸屬，但我方從未拒絕在不預設條件的情況與中國進行有意義對話；近年雙邊官方互動中止，咎在北京政府預設前提，片面拒絕協商聯繫。尤有甚者，中國常對台灣內政與外交指指點點，脅迫、分化同時並行，如今又把矛頭指向美台關係及谷立言，其無視台灣主流民意的一貫蠻橫作風，簡直豈有此理！
Appendix II
The Liberty Times Editorial: China’s smear campaign [against Ambassador Raymond Greene] has failed
Tue, Jul 21, 2026, page 8
The Liberty Times Editorial: China’s smear campaign has failed - Taipei Times
|
Many in Taiwan see American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Director Raymond Greene as a diligent and capable diplomat. Not only has he married into a Taiwanese family, but he has also integrated into everyday life in Taiwan — visiting traditional markets and buying festive treats on holidays, interacting with local vendors and residents, drinking bubble tea and eating pork belly buns. He engages regularly with Taiwanese civic groups and political parties across the spectrum.
With his finger on the pulse of Taiwanese society, Greene dispels “US skepticism,” an evolving collection of manipulative narratives claiming that the US is a treacherous ally exploiting Taiwan for its own purposes. He consistently reaffirms Washington’s support for Taiwan and promotes economic and industrial cooperation — in areas including uncrewed vehicle development — between Taiwan and the US. Greene has demonstrated genuine goodwill toward Taiwan.
Additionally, in a 30-year diplomatic career spanning the US National Security Council and the US Department of State, he has served in Taiwan, China, Japan and the Philippines, accumulating ample experience as an astute expert on East Asian affairs. As former AIT director William Stanton has said, Greene is eminently professional and highly regarded in diplomatic circles.
Given his background, Greene has a deep understanding of Taiwanese politics and cross-strait relations, frequently offering clear-eyed observations as an informed third party. His interviews and public statements in the past few months have been full of incisive comments, many of which warrant special attention.
In an interview with United Daily News on June 23, Greene said that more than 70 percent of Taiwan’s public supports maintaining the cross-strait “status quo” and that the positions of Taiwan’s political parties are also not as polarized as they might appear. The parties all support maintaining deterrence against China while pursuing cross-strait dialogue, with their chief difference being just how far such a dialogue should go.
Meanwhile, conditions that had made cross-strait engagement mutually attractive a decade ago — such as political ambiguity and the willingness of Taiwanese to test closer ties — no longer exist. Beijing now demands that any dialogue be prefaced by Taiwan accepting the “one China” principle of the so-called “1992 consensus” and “opposing Taiwanese independence.”
The People’s Republic of China (PRC) is also conducting cognitive warfare intended to exacerbate divisions within Taiwan, Greene said in the interview. However, China will not get what it wants that way. Instead, the consensus of Taiwanese and political parties provides a solid basis for Beijing to talk directly with Taiwan’s democratically elected leaders without preconditions, Greene said.
Following a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in May, US policy toward Taiwan remains the same; Washington continues to promote asymmetric strategies to maintain military balance in the Taiwan Strait. During a keynote address at the Taichung Drone Industry Opportunities Forum on July 2, Greene said that nothing would deter conflict more effectively than turning Taiwan into a “hornet’s nest” of aerial, surface and subsurface drones, and that the US was prepared to help Taiwan realize that vision.
Greene statements reflect his hopes for Taiwanese politics and cross-strait relations. They reflect the official US position as well and are, by any measure, entirely orthodox. Yet China, which has always disregarded the welfare of Taiwanese, has taken great umbrage. The PRC has grown especially shrill of late, twice attacking Greene publicly through a spokesperson of its Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO).
First, during a regular TAO’s news conference on July 2, TAO spokeswoman Zhu Fenglian (朱鳳蓮) indirectly chastised Greene, accusing “certain individuals” of injecting discordant noises into discussions concerning Beijing’s “Taiwan Question.” Zhu dismissed the “status quo” mentioned in Greene’s June 23 interview as little more than political packaging and claimed that, although the PRC and US presidents had already reached an understanding, some US officials were outwardly professing compliance while covertly acting against it.
Then, at a July 8 news conference, TAO spokesman Chen Binhua (陳斌華) named Greene in reference to the US dilplomat’s July 2 speech in Taichung. The TAO branded Greene as Taiwan’s self-appointed “supreme overlord.” It accused him of meddling with domestic politics, promoting ideas such as cross-strait dialogue without preconditions and the porcupine defense strategy with which Taiwan would deter a PRC attack through concepts such as the drone “hornet’s nest.”
Beijing also accused Greene of pressuring the Legislative Yuan to pass the Cabinet’s special defense budget, calling for stronger asymmetric warfare capabilities, “slipping weapons” to pro-Taiwanese independence forces and inciting cross-strait confrontation in an effort to turn Taiwan into a “powder keg” and an “island of minefields.” Chen concluded that Greene had defied Trump’s “solemn statements,” undermined peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait and was attempting to push US-China relations and cross-strait relations into dangerous territory.
The PRC’s furious campaign to brand Greene as a renegade has failed. On July 9, the US Department of State promptly dismissed Beijing’s accusations as “baseless,” saying that Greene “fully represents the US government’s position.” Washington’s Taiwan policy remains unchanged, it said.
As US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has confirmed, that policy continues to be guided by the Taiwan Relations Act, the Three Joint Communiques between the US and China, and the US’ “six assurances” to Taiwan. The US supports Taiwan in acquiring the critical capabilities it needs for its own defense and continues to urge China to stop coercing Taiwan. Instead, China should “engage in meaningful dialogue without preconditions with Taiwan’s democratically elected government.”
China’s hostility toward Greene exposes a familiar Chinese Communist Party (CCP) tactic. At its core, the criticisms seek to drive a wedge between Greene and his superiors in Washington, including Rubio and Trump. Chinese officials have also put words in Trump’s mouth, claiming that the US president had made “solemn statements” concerning Taiwanese independence and US arms sales to Taiwan, even though no such remarks were publicly made. This kind of rhetorical sleight of hand is a recurring pattern following high-level US-China meetings. Records or PRC statements issued after such meetings often present China’s unilateral claims as mutually agreed conclusions. Repetition does not turn fiction into fact, and such assertions have repeatedly been corrected.
In its latest denunciation of Greene, the PRC has simply employed the same old playbook. Unsurprisingly, it failed again.
It is important to keep in mind that Greene is the US’ highest-ranking diplomatic representative in Taiwan. He serves under the framework established by the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979. As the director of AIT, the US’ de facto embassy, Greene speaks for the US government. His efforts to advance shared Taiwanese and US interests, with assessments grounded in fact, are professional and legitimate. As Taiwanese have witnessed, Greene brings considerable expertise to security issues involving US allies along the First Island Chain. He has spoken publicly about possible scenarios of a PRC attack on Taiwan and has stressed the importance of deterrence and asymmetric defense to make an invasion prohibitively costly.
In the past few months, he has also engaged with civil groups and parties across Taiwan’s political spectrum while helping to facilitate visits to the US by senior Taiwanese political figures. His work has focused on promoting constructive political and economic exchanges between Washington and Taipei.
Taiwan and China are governed separately and neither exercises authority over the other. Yet Taiwan has never ruled out meaningful dialogue with China without preconditions.
The current suspension of official cross-strait communication is the result of Beijing’s insistence on preconditions before allowing any channels for consultation. Worse still, China routinely seeks to dictate Taiwan’s domestic and foreign affairs, combining coercion with efforts to divide Taiwanese society.
Now, China has also taken aim at Taiwan-US relations and Greene in particular. This persistent bullying, carried out in defiance of mainstream public opinion in Taiwan, is simply outrageous.
The audacity of the TAO goes beyond China’s pervasive “wolf warrior diplomacy.” It has been emboldened by domestic political and media figures who echo the same rhetoric on this side of the Taiwan Strait.
Among the most conspicuous is Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Deputy Chairman Hsiao Hsu-tsen (蕭旭岑).
During a Feb. 6 radio interview, Hsiao said that Greene ranks only slightly above a section chief within the US State Department hierarchy. Taiwan was allowing an official supposedly below the level of a department director to make one demand after another, Hsiao said.
The latest verbal assault on Greene by the TAO is an example of how the CCP and the KMT are in lockstep when it comes to anti-US rhetoric.
That convergence was again on display on July 10. Even as Typhoon Bavi was fast approaching, Hsiao traveled to Wuhan for the 20th Hubei-Wuhan Taiwan Week cohosted by the TAO. At the opening ceremony of the event, which had all the features of a “united front” outreach program, Hsiao invoked the 1938 Battle of Wuhan and said that people should remember when the KMT and CCP had “joined hands to resist Japan.”
He said that a relationship between the KMT and the CCP is essential to stability in the Taiwan Strait. It is precisely this kind of political alignment that reveals a dangerous vulnerability within Taiwan as well as the extent of its severity.
聯合報社論／谷立言要怎樣的兩岸現狀與朝野和解？
2026-06-26 01:08
|
中時社論》兩岸對話 不該由谷立言帶風向
22:002026/06/27
美國在台協會（AIT）處長谷立言近日接受媒體專訪，除重申美國對台政策不變，還意有所指地表示，維持現狀是台灣多數民意，也是兩岸對話基礎，並話鋒一轉批評北京為兩岸互動設定前提，非有意維持現狀。谷立言搶先界定「現狀」與「對話」，是議程設定的典型操作。
[支共中央電視台] 日月譚天丨為何一個外國人把自己當成台灣「太上皇」？
2026-07-13 22:59:22
赤媒香港文匯報
david chou
Appendix I
[轉貼Dr. Seashon Chen的回應與Post]
Appendix II
谷立言專訪：維持現狀 是兩岸對話的基礎
2026-06-23 00:00
https://udn.com/news/story/124924/9581906
美國在台協會（ＡＩＴ）處長谷立言（Raymond Greene）在AIT台北辦事處接受本報專訪時表示，台灣政黨在面對民主和安全等議題時，彼此觀點比想像中更接近，不是非黑即白、非藍即綠；台灣有支持維持現狀的七成民意，這可作為台灣民選領袖與北京對話的絕佳基礎；而北京嘗試在台灣製造分裂，不會得到想要的結果。
谷立言接受本報專訪時，談到台灣民眾支持維持現狀是多數，這樣的架構和共識，從前總統蔡英文政府到現在的賴清德政府均保持⼀致，「坦⽩說，我認為未來任⼀政黨執政，都非常可能維持在這樣的共識之中，因為有超過七成台灣⼈的強烈⽀持」。
談到北京，谷立言表示，北京的一貫模式是「對話之前要滿足前提條件」，事實上，不設前提的互動，才是避免誤判的最佳方式，也能有機會找到和平解決分歧的方式。
谷立言指出，美方持續呼籲北京與台灣民選領袖互動，因為台灣有高度維持現狀的共識，這是對話的絕佳基礎；在台灣高度共識的狀態下，在台灣社會製造分裂不會讓北京得到想要的結果。
谷立言說，台灣政黨在面對民主和安全等議題時，彼此觀點比想像中更接近，不是非黑即白、非藍即綠；藍綠最大不同在於對「兩岸互動程度」的主張，藍的擔⼼互動太少，會誤判情勢或錯失經濟機會，綠的擔⼼互動太多會導致滲透或經濟脅迫，這些也存在美國和其他民主國家對中國的辯論中，非常合理。
谷立言說，多數台灣民眾支持維持現狀，也存在少數極端觀點。他舉例，有人說「維繫和平的最好方式就是迎合中國，削弱台灣自身的防衛」，這個觀點的前提假設是，中國的目標是維持現狀，「而從中國現在的所作所為，我看不出這點」。
谷立言表示，台灣的多數政黨和民眾依然支持維持現狀、兩岸對話，並維持嚇阻能力，這樣台灣才能維持其生活方式、民主制度和繁榮。
談鄭麗文 指交流有助了解
近日藍營高層接連訪美，谷立言並未正面回應國民黨主席鄭麗文是否成功「釋疑」；他只說，這是鄭麗文對美國提出理念的好機會，美國也藉此傳遞自身觀點，也就是投資防衛能⼒的重要，這是維持台海和平的要件。
谷立言指出，意見交流有助相互了解，確保能達成維持台海和平穩定的共同目標。
「10年轉變 兩岸相互吸引已不存在」 可能走向衝突？谷立言對此懷疑
2026-06-23 00:02
美國在台協會（ＡＩＴ）處長谷立言二○一四年出任美駐成都總領事，二○二四年出任ＡＩＴ處長，見證兩岸關係起伏。他說，十年前的兩岸相互吸引已不存在，如今大家擔心兩岸會走向衝突，他期待，在可預見的未來維持現狀，爭取更多契機。
谷立言說，他認為，比起政治領袖們的表述，兩岸關係的基礎更應回到基層人民對於政治和經濟的看法。
谷立言分享，他二○一四年到成都時，可說是兩岸關係高點，很多台灣人赴陸求學、工作或投資；那時候普遍認為，中國的經濟磁吸效應，最終可能成為解決兩岸分歧的方式。
「我當時有點懷疑。」谷立言說，中國經濟有吸引力，但同時，很多中國年輕人很佩服台灣民主，並認為中國未來也許會走向民主；這某種程度反映當下的中國發展：在經濟開放後，下一步會走向政治開放。
谷立言說，這可能導致中國後來改變政治發展方向，從而影響經濟；十年前的相互吸引已經不存在了，現在全世界看兩岸關係會認為是比較可能走向衝突，「這一點我也是懷疑的。」
谷立言表示，改變發生得很快，未來十年內的狀況和今天相比，可能又是截然不同；因此，若可以在可預見的未來維持現狀，就可以在未來看到更多當前所沒有看到的契機。
谷立言專訪：維持現狀 是兩岸對話的基礎
2026-06-23 00:00
美國在台協會（ＡＩＴ）處長谷立言（Raymond Greene）在AIT台北辦事處接受本報專訪時表示，台灣政黨在面對民主和安全等議題時，彼此觀點比想像中更接近，不是非黑即白、非藍即綠；台灣有支持維持現狀的七成民意，這可作為台灣民選領袖與北京對話的絕佳基礎；而北京嘗試在台灣製造分裂，不會得到想要的結果。
谷立言接受本報專訪時，談到台灣民眾支持維持現狀是多數，這樣的架構和共識，從前總統蔡英文政府到現在的賴清德政府均保持⼀致，「坦⽩說，我認為未來任⼀政黨執政，都非常可能維持在這樣的共識之中，因為有超過七成台灣⼈的強烈⽀持」。
談到北京，谷立言表示，北京的一貫模式是「對話之前要滿足前提條件」，事實上，不設前提的互動，才是避免誤判的最佳方式，也能有機會找到和平解決分歧的方式。
谷立言指出，美方持續呼籲北京與台灣民選領袖互動，因為台灣有高度維持現狀的共識，這是對話的絕佳基礎；在台灣高度共識的狀態下，在台灣社會製造分裂不會讓北京得到想要的結果。
谷立言說，台灣政黨在面對民主和安全等議題時，彼此觀點比想像中更接近，不是非黑即白、非藍即綠；藍綠最大不同在於對「兩岸互動程度」的主張，藍的擔⼼互動太少，會誤判情勢或錯失經濟機會，綠的擔⼼互動太多會導致滲透或經濟脅迫，這些也存在美國和其他民主國家對中國的辯論中，非常合理。
谷立言說，多數台灣民眾支持維持現狀，也存在少數極端觀點。他舉例，有人說「維繫和平的最好方式就是迎合中國，削弱台灣自身的防衛」，這個觀點的前提假設是，中國的目標是維持現狀，「而從中國現在的所作所為，我看不出這點」。
谷立言表示，台灣的多數政黨和民眾依然支持維持現狀、兩岸對話，並維持嚇阻能力，這樣台灣才能維持其生活方式、民主制度和繁榮。
談鄭麗文 指交流有助了解
近日藍營高層接連訪美，谷立言並未正面回應國民黨主席鄭麗文是否成功「釋疑」；他只說，這是鄭麗文對美國提出理念的好機會，美國也藉此傳遞自身觀點，也就是投資防衛能⼒的重要，這是維持台海和平的要件。
谷立言指出，意見交流有助相互了解，確保能達成維持台海和平穩定的共同目標。
「10年轉變 兩岸相互吸引已不存在」 可能走向衝突？谷立言對此懷疑
2026-06-23 00:02
美國在台協會（ＡＩＴ）處長谷立言二○一四年出任美駐成都總領事，二○二四年出任ＡＩＴ處長，見證兩岸關係起伏。他說，十年前的兩岸相互吸引已不存在，如今大家擔心兩岸會走向衝突，他期待，在可預見的未來維持現狀，爭取更多契機。
谷立言說，他認為，比起政治領袖們的表述，兩岸關係的基礎更應回到基層人民對於政治和經濟的看法。
谷立言分享，他二○一四年到成都時，可說是兩岸關係高點，很多台灣人赴陸求學、工作或投資；那時候普遍認為，中國的經濟磁吸效應，最終可能成為解決兩岸分歧的方式。
「我當時有點懷疑。」谷立言說，中國經濟有吸引力，但同時，很多中國年輕人很佩服台灣民主，並認為中國未來也許會走向民主；這某種程度反映當下的中國發展：在經濟開放後，下一步會走向政治開放。
谷立言說，這可能導致中國後來改變政治發展方向，從而影響經濟；十年前的相互吸引已經不存在了，現在全世界看兩岸關係會認為是比較可能走向衝突，「這一點我也是懷疑的。」
谷立言表示，改變發生得很快，未來十年內的狀況和今天相比，可能又是截然不同；因此，若可以在可預見的未來維持現狀，就可以在未來看到更多當前所沒有看到的契機。
美對台軍售不考慮中國意見 川賴通話？谷立言「沒資訊可以分享」
2026-06-23 00:00
美國在台協會（ＡＩＴ）處長谷立言在AIT台北辦事處接受聯合報專訪，談川習會後的台美關係、台灣安全、軍售議題，也談美國在印太地區的政策。以下為問答內容摘錄：
問：美國國防部長赫塞斯在香格⾥拉對話稱美中關係處於最好狀態，可是同時，解放軍對台海騷擾和威脅沒有減緩，包含最近中國海警船在台灣東部的⾏動？
答：兩者不⽭盾。如同赫塞斯部長所說，我們希望跟中國建立穩定且具建設性的關係，但這不表⽰我們會減少在嚇阻衝突、維持穩定或回應⼀些導致區域不穩作為的努⼒。我們的做法不會是挑釁、引發衝突或是製造摩擦，我們會嘗試強化嚇阻、與盟友合作，以及看區域局勢發展⽽動。
不只美國這麼做，從Quad（美日印澳四方安全對話）、歐洲到南韓，⼤家都有共同理解，針對破壞台海、東海、南海現狀的舉動，都需採相應嚇阻⾏動來避免破壞穩定。
問：區域國家最近都在談論台灣有事（contingency），願意投入的立場各不相同，您如何看待？
答：美國在印太區域的盟友都有共識，要避免緊急事態發⽣，就要做好嚇阻。依照美國國家安全戰略，要與區域盟友共同維持第⼀島鏈現狀，避免任何武⼒奪台的嘗試，美國⼀⽅⾯將最新建的防衛能⼒部署到印太，⼀⽅⾯強化與盟友合作。
問：從各⽅與會Computex，看台灣的地緣政治⾼風險和台灣的全球供應鏈地位？
答：台灣應該歡迎這樣的國際關注。台灣在ＡＩ、半導體、無⼈機等領域扮演重要地位，讓台灣安全與全球息息相關。全球很多國家到組織，都開始表達關切台灣局勢，因為⼤家都了解台海衝突不只影響台海，⽽是關乎全球和所有⼈的⽣計。
問：當各國都在提⾼軍費和提升軍⼒，台灣落後了嗎？
答：美台⼀直密切合作，去年共同討論台灣需要什麼樣的不對稱能⼒來強化威懾，最後台灣國防部在去年秋天提出⼀筆預算。在今年五⽉，立法院通過其中的⼀部分，我們感到鼓舞。這是幫助台灣得到⾃⼰所需戰⼒的重要⼀步。美台將持續合作，協助台灣獲得所需能⼒，也要達成賴清德總統的國防⽀出占比GDP百分之五的⽬標。
問：台灣推動⼆次軍購的前景？美國是不是在拖延對台軍售？
答：我們不對台灣立法或相關預算程序表達立場。美國將持續與各政黨溝通，我們認為台灣應該要能找到挹注相關軍購的資⾦來源，來實現國防部所提軍購案。台灣迫切所需的關鍵戰⼒包含無⼈系統、整合式防空⾶彈防禦系統，以及C4ISR。
魯比歐國務卿⽇前在國會聽證會已經說，美國對台軍售沒有暫停，⽽且，雖然中國就美國軍售台灣表達立場，但是美國在做決定時，不考慮中國的立場或意⾒。
川普的第⼀任期和第⼆任期都⼤⼒⽀持台灣防衛需求，提出⼤額軍售案就是證明。美國國會對台灣安全也有跨黨派的強烈⽀持，包含編列幾十億美金預算，利用對外軍事融資（ＦＭＦ）和台灣安全合作倡議（ＴＳＣＩ）等援助台灣。
問：美台軍售諮商進⾏中？
答：持續諮商，從上到下不同層級的討論，從防衛需求、交貨期程，到未來的需求，討論⼀直存在，ＡＩＴ安全合作組扮演重要⾓⾊。
問：川賴通話可能性？
答：我沒有資訊可以分享。
問：軍售交付沒問題？
答：赫塞斯部長清楚表⽰，不需要擔⼼中東衝突會影響美國在該區域的防衛準備。台灣安全是美國的優先要務，正如同剛剛所說，台灣與全球連動，台灣不⽤擔⼼受到中東衝突的直接影響，⽽且我們預期中東戰事很快會結束。
問：美軍印太司令有提出Hellscape（地獄景象）的情境，希望將無⼈機投入台灣防衛，就台美合作發展現況，五年內可能產⽣類似景象？
答：對台灣來說是個重要機會，如果台灣⼤規模投資無⼈機產業，能在三領域獲益。第⼀，戰略性層⾯能提升台灣防衛能⼒；第⼆是對台灣的經濟機會；第三是與國際接軌。⾄於你問到未來五年，我會認為若台灣正確投資，應可在未來五年看到美國與台灣在無⼈機領域占主導地位，如同我們在ＡＩ和半導體產業⼀樣。我對未來是相當樂觀的。
問：您觀摩幾次城鎮韌性演習和漢光演習，看到台灣在構築防衛韌性有沒有不⾜處？
答：賴清德總統堅持投入全社會防衛韌性，令⼈印象深刻。我兩年前抵達台灣（擔任處長）時，就將⽀持台灣韌性作為三項優先要務之⼀。去年從中央政府到地⽅政府，都開始規畫培養韌性能⼒，也提出要投資什麼樣的物資和政策。今年的⽬標則是整合這些努⼒，期待未來八⽉的漢光演習中看到更多。如果台灣完成整合，就可以真正在各⽅⾯都達到韌性需求。
美中穩定 谷立言：美對台政策不變
2026-06-23 00:04
美國在台協會（ＡＩＴ）處長谷立言在ＡＩＴ台北辦事處接受本報專訪表示，美對台政策不變，軍售沒有暫停。他樂觀看待台美共同發展無人機前景，感謝立法院長韓國瑜在立法院努力達成支持台灣防衛能力的共識；他並透露，將和台中市長盧秀燕共同推動無人機發展。
谷立言說，非常感謝賴清德總統一再強調台灣支持維持現狀；他提到，前總統蔡英文在建立台灣各政黨及台灣社會對於「支持現狀」的共識上，貢獻良多。
美國總統川普在川習會後，對台灣議題表達「不希望有人因為美國支持走向台獨」和「美國不願跨海作戰」的立場，並稱對台軍售可以成為籌碼。谷立言表示，美國的對台政策是以台灣關係法、美中三聯合公報與六項保證為指引；美國的一中政策也以川普去年秋天發布的國家安全戰略為指引，即美國會維護在第一島鏈的和平安全，包含台灣。
谷立言說，美國希望與中國建立穩定關係，但不代表美國將減少嚇阻衝突、維持穩定或回應一些導致區域不穩作為的努力；除了美台及盟友密切合作外，全球很多國家到組織，都開始表達關切台灣局勢。
立法院五月通過七八○○億元的軍購特別預算條例後，行政院再度提出二一○○億元的無人機採購特別條例草案。谷立言表示，不對台灣立法程序或預算表達立場，美國會持續與各政黨溝通。
他表示，台灣國防部去年秋天提出預算，立法院今年五月通過其中一部分，這是幫台灣得到自己所需戰力的重要一步；到目前為止，美台從上到下各層級，就防衛需求、交貨期程到未來的需求，持續諮商。
美軍印太司令部為台海局勢曾規畫「地獄景象」。被問到以台美合作進展，五年內能否打造此景象？谷立言說，台灣已有發展無人機的科技與產業基礎，美國無人機公司也到台灣來尋求夥伴關係。
谷立言：陸設前提 不利建設性對話
2026-06-23 00:00
問：美國總統川普在會晤中國國家主席習近平後的評論，提到不願⾒到台灣獨立、不願被捲入戰爭等評論的背景？
答：美政府⾼層會前已清楚表達美對台政策沒有任何改變；會後國務卿魯比歐也強調這點，甚⾄在峰會期間，美國駐中國⼤使也重申，⾼層官員清楚對中國傳達「美國對台政策沒有改變」。
美國對台政策以台灣關係法、三項聯合公報與六項保證為指引，美國的政策也是以川普政府去年秋天發布的國家安全戰略為指引，亦即我們會維護在第⼀島鏈的和平安全，包含台灣。
如同川普總統多次強調，我們不願⾒到台海爆發衝突，也不想看到任何片⾯改變現狀的作為，我們會遵守長期以來的政策，包含美國確保台海和平與安全的承諾。
問：賴清德總統在川習會後回應稱捍衛中華民國現狀，沒有台獨問題。您怎麼看國安會前秘書長邱義仁說的蔡規賴隨？
答：非常感謝賴清德總統⼀再強調台灣⽀持維持現狀，包含他最近在五二○演說中有提到。
我覺得蔡總統（前總統蔡英⽂）在建立台灣各政黨及社會對於「⽀持現狀」的共識上，貢獻良多。這樣的架構和共識，從蔡政府到賴政府以來保持⼀致， 坦⽩說，我認為未來任⼀政黨執政，都非常可能維持在這樣的共識之中，因為有超過七成的台灣⼈民強烈⽀持。
這也是為什麼我們持續呼籲北京與台灣民選領袖互動。因為這反映了台灣的共識，能作為對話的絕佳基礎，能解決台海分歧。
就北京來說，這比嘗試在台灣社會製造分裂能獲得的好處更多。在台灣⾼度共識的狀態下，製造分裂不會讓北京得到想要的結果。
問：所謂中國⼤陸意圖在台灣社會製造分裂，是指台灣的政黨或政治⼈物嗎？
答：北京⼀貫模式是「對話之前要先滿⾜前提條件」。這其實不利建設性的對話。我們認為北京應該跟台灣所有民選領袖在不設前提下互動，我認為這才是避免誤判或誤解的最佳⽅式，也能夠有機會找到和平解決分歧的⽅式。除非，可以達成不設條件的往來，否則任何努⼒都可能被視為操弄內部⾓⼒，這是不對的。
採訪側記／平衡的藝術 是谷立言日常考驗
聯合報／ 記者張文馨
2026-06-23 00:00
美國在台協會（ＡＩＴ）處長谷立言派駐台灣兩年多來，從美中台到台灣國內政治現實，都在面對「隨時在改變」的壓力。正值美中尋求穩定關係，美國總統川普是否改變其「一個中國」政策，進而損及台灣利益？成為ＡＩＴ處長的必考題；面對朝小野大、藍綠對立，如何與不同政治光譜人士搏感情，找出可能達成共識之處。平衡的藝術是他的日常考驗，也展現在接受本報專訪的過程中。
川習會後美對台政策是否改變？他的標準答案是，美中關係穩定，不影響美台關係。事實上，包含谷立言在內，從國務卿魯比歐到美國駐中國大使龐德偉，都是川普親信，不會越過川普去表述對中政策。作為ＡＩＴ處長，谷立言堪稱「沒有參與川習會的當事人」，在川習會後用最快速度接受中央社書面專訪來表明「對台政策沒有改變」立場，讓人看出了他的第一層小心翼翼。
對於藍綠政治人物，在這次專訪中，藍綠政要賴清德、蔡英文、盧秀燕、鄭麗文和韓國瑜，都被提（問）到了。谷立言讚許賴總統表達支持維持現狀，也肯定蔡英文促成台灣社會達成支持現狀共識的貢獻。
在國民黨主席鄭麗文訪美結束，谷立言只客氣說有溝通都是好事。盧秀燕是谷立言主動提起的，他將兩人互動嵌入無人機合作，既自然又明顯，顯然保留與盧未來的發展空間。
至於立法院長韓國瑜，可能是谷立言最經常在臉書曬合照的政治人物。他讚許韓國瑜促成國會支持國防特別預算的努力，如今韓國瑜更在美方邀請下第二度訪問華府。
ＡＩＴ清楚朝野對立情況，從預算、法案到大罷免，台灣的政治環境在這兩年走向極化，是不爭的事實。谷立言從中硬是找到「支持台灣安全與現狀」的空間，並用柔軟的語調訴求台灣共識，這是他的第二層小心翼翼。
谷立言的外派經歷橫跨第一島鏈，經手業務從經濟、政治到軍事，在地緣政治變化的敏感時刻，谷立言在台灣執行外交任務，爭取美國利益；至於未來美中關係的變化會如何牽動美台關係發展，他很想、卻也很難回應，回到外交官的謹言慎行，不多評論。
david chou
Donovan’s Deep Dives: The American lean, Greene fighting machine
Unlike his recent predecessors, AIT’s current director has openly thrown his weight around in local politics
By Courtney Donovan Smith 石東文 / Staff Columnist
Donovan’s Deep Dives: The American lean, Greene fighting machine - Taipei Times
|
For a diplomat, American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Director Raymond Greene has been anything but subtle. Unlike his recent predecessors as American de facto ambassadors, he has openly thrown his weight around in local politics.
The last time that I can recall Americans becoming blatantly involved in local politics was in September 2011, when the Financial Times quoted a “senior US official” after meeting then-presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in Washington. “She left us with distinct doubts about whether she is both willing and able to continue the stability in cross-strait relations the region has enjoyed in recent years,” the official said. [這是在說Obama的國安顧問Thomas Donilon, 他不懂TIW的 “台灣共識”.]
Though by no means the only reason she lost, this comment was considered a heavy blow to her campaign, and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) incumbent Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) easily won reelection. Intriguingly, then-AIT Director William Stanton has, since his retirement from diplomatic service, written about his differing opinions with the American establishment during that period in the Taiwan News, though he did not reference this incident specifically.
[AIT director Raymond Greene and Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen greet each other at a banquet in Taipei hosted by the American Chamber of Commerce in Taiwan on March 26. Photo: CNA]
At the time, Stanton wrote, the establishment was influenced by retired officials paid by US corporate leaders and used by Beijing to foster closer ties. “Undoubtedly, they all believed they were acting in the US’ interest to foster trade ties, but at the same time, they would be well paid for doing so.”
Starting around the beginning of US President Donald Trump’s first term, Americans began to awaken to the threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and recognize that despite increased trade and prosperity, the CCP had no intention of democratizing, reforming or playing by international rules.
Though it was obvious that the US warmly embraced Tsai after she won the election in 2016, they were careful in how they expressed it. They showed strong support for the democratically elected government of Taiwan, but were careful to put this in non-partisan terms. It was widely assumed — myself included — that the Americans preferred the more pro-US and firmer stance on Beijing that the DPP represented, but nothing was said by AIT that could pin the Americans down as being partisan in Taiwan’s domestic politics.
PARTISAN OR NOT?
AIT would likely deny being involved in domestic politics, but they are.
Although backing the administration could theoretically be claimed as nonpartisan, since the proposal was backed by the DPP caucus in the legislature, it was partisan in practice.
AIT can rightfully point to their extensive outreach to the opposition Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and especially the KMT. However, Greene is clearly playing favorites on which opposition politicians he spends the most time with.
AIT directors typically only visit Taichung occasionally. Not Greene, he has been here countless times this year.
AIT can point out that Taichung is Taiwan’s second-largest city; the city government has been very welcoming; there are significant American investments by companies such as Micron and Corning. As the city is home to many of Taiwan’s defense and drone industry headquarters, AIT needs to be actively engaged here. This is all true, but why has there been such a sharp disparity between the amount of time Greene spends here compared to his predecessors?
Obviously, to cultivate a relationship with Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕). This makes sense; she is one of the most powerful leaders in the KMT and is considered a frontrunner to represent her party in the 2028 presidential elections. She has a reputation for being more pro-American, stronger on national defense and a staunch supporter of Taichung’s drone industry.
Lu was a powerful ally in getting a special defense budget passed to pay for American arms purchases, and is considered an ally in pushing for higher spending on the local defense and drone industries.
Yet, by openly supporting Lu and similarly friendly KMT politicians, Greene is putting his thumb on the scales in internal KMT politics by favoring them over the more hardline, pro-China KMT chair Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) and her allies.
MAN WITH A PLAN
It would make a great, attention-getting headline to liken the assertive Greene to China’s “wolf warrior” diplomats, but that would be way off the mark. Despite the new interventionist strategy regarding local politics, Greene is disciplined and thoughtful in his comments. He would never fly off the handle like the Chinese consul-general in Osaka, who in reference to Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi said: “The filthy head that recklessly sticks itself in must be cut off without a moment’s hesitation.”
An interesting question is how much of this strategy has been devised by Greene himself. Unlike ambassadors in the pre-digital world who had more decision-making power, mass communications have tied diplomats more closely to their capitals.
However, in Trump’s second term, much of the State Department’s staff have been gutted. This may have left more of the decision-making burden on Greene himself.
His top boss, Trump, does not seem the type to micromanage Taiwan affairs, preferring to do that with his ballroom. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is knowledgeable about Taiwan, and almost certainly pays some attention, but he is likely distracted by the war in Iran, and running the four departments he has been put in charge of.
Greene is no lightweight. According to his AIT biography: “Earlier assignments included chief of the political-military affairs unit at the US Embassy in Tokyo, deputy chief of the political section at AIT Taipei, and as a political officer in Tokyo and Manila.”
Notice his background is in political affairs. Combine that with being a Japanese and Mandarin speaker, and he is highly qualified to craft political strategy. Add in a vacuum of experts in the State Department, it would make sense to give him broad instructions and let him figure out how to best achieve them.
This is speculation, of course, but it appears that the CCP has come to a similar conclusion. It is rare for Chinese state media to attack AIT directors, but a string of pieces in CCP mouthpiece Global Times have called him out by name.
They clearly think he is running his own show and are trying to drive a wedge between him and Washington. Global Times has been running headlines like “Is Raymond Greene the decision-maker in US’ Taiwan policy?” and “Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson criticizes Greene for contradicting Trump’s stated position, threatening cross-strait stability.”
Their attempt to create division does not appear to be working, at least not publicly. Responding to a request from the Central News Agency for comment, a State Department spokesperson said that “China’s accusations are baseless” and that Greene “fully represents the US government’s position.”
CCP animosity towards Greene also suggests that they share another of my conclusions: His strategy is working.
He has successfully cultivated the right friends in both the government and in the KMT. That is a delicate balancing act.
It is hard to quantify his contributions, but it is clear his efforts were a factor in forcing Cheng to back off on killing the special military budget entirely. KMT politicians know that being outright anti-American and undermining national security are ballot-box poison, and Greene leveraged that effectively.
Remarkably, he has done so with little blowback. Historically, American attempts to intervene in local politics were viewed with resentment at best, and at times with outright hostility and protests. Not this time.
If my theory that he is crafting much of this strategy personally is correct, then Greene is someone to watch carefully. He knows what he is doing.
Donovan’s Deep Dives is a regular column by Courtney Donovan Smith (石東文) who writes in-depth analysis on everything about Taiwan’s political scene and geopolitics. Donovan is also the central Taiwan correspondent at ICRT FM100 Radio News, co-publisher of Compass Magazine, co-founder Taiwan Report (report.tw) and former chair of the Taichung American Chamber of Commerce. Follow him on X: @donovan_smith.
|
Dear Honorable ________,
Abstract: The PRC is using land reclamation building Xiamen International Airport just 3 kilometers (1.864 miles) from Kinmen County on the west side of the Taiwan Strait. Kinmen County is currently under the jurisdiction of the Taiwan authorities (the ROC government in exile in Taipei). The United States must consult with the Taiwan authorities as soon as possible and take over Taiwan (Taiwan Island and Penghu) to prevent Communist China from annexing Taiwan.
--- The Essence Match the Appearance ---
Communist China has controlled the Taiwan authorities' (ex-ROC) Legislative Yuan. The annual budget and National Defense Authorization Act are still being obstructed by legislators from the CCP-controlled Chinese Revolutionary Party (KMT) and Taiwan People's Party (TPP). With the midterm elections approaching at the end of the year, given that the CCP can interfere in US elections, the situation in Taiwan is even more precarious. For the sake of cross-strait security, the US and the Taiwan authorities need to clarify the relationship between the Taiwan authorities and the ex-ROC.
The Republic of China went into exile in Taipei in 1950, and by 2026, it will have been in exile for 76 years. After military occupation, martial law massacre, white terror, indoctrination, democratic transition, and illegitimate elections, the Presidential Office's official website now displays the (small font size 10) print "OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT REPUBLIC OF CHINA (TAIWAN)". The Ministry of Foreign Affairs' official website first displays "Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of China"; and at the end of its homepage, it displays "Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of China (Taiwan), …, Taiwan (R.O.C.)." So many names make people dazzled and stunned.
The ROC government-in-exile occupies Taiwan and Penghu, where territorial sovereignty is uncertain. It holds presidential and legislative elections without a country name, and the results are not recognized by most countries who know international laws and conventions. According to the Treaty of Peace with Japan, signed by more than 40 Allied powers in World War II and effective in 1952, the United States is the principal occupying Power in Taiwan. The US severed diplomatic relations with the ROC government-in-exile under the Taiwan Relations Act, defining Taiwan as the ROC before 1979.
Following the severing of diplomatic ties between the United States and the Republic of China (ROC), Taiwan (ex-ROC) has used the following names to publicly identify itself: 1. In the Olympic Committee, Taiwan participates in activities under the name "Chinese Taipei"; 2. In the World Trade Organization, Taiwan joins as a member under the name "Chinese Taipei"; 3. On the websites of Palau, a country with which it has diplomatic relations, the country name is displayed as "TAIWAN REPUBLIC OF CHINA," and the Embassy displayed as "Embassy of the Republic of China (Taiwan) in the Republic of Palau"; 4. On the websites of the United States, which severed diplomatic ties, "TAIWAN REPUBLIC OF CHINA" and "Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the US" are displayed; and 5. Coast Guard vessels are marked with "TAIWAN Coast Guard Administration R.O.C. Coast Guard."
According to the Treaty of Peace with Japan signed by more than 40 Allied powers in World War II and which came into effect in 1952, the United States was the principal occupying power in Taiwan. The United States severed diplomatic relations with the ROC government-in-exile under the Taiwan Relations Act, defining Taiwan as part of the ROC before 1979. After 1996, the ROC government-in-exile held presidential and legislative elections in its territories (Kinmen and Matsu) and its occupied areas (Taiwan and Penghu) without a country name; the results of these elections were not recognized by nearly 200 nations.
The current nature and appearance of the Republic of China (ROC): Its territory consists only of Kinmen and Matsu; its population is predominantly comprised of Chinese immigrants and their descendants born in Taiwan after World War II; its government, the ROC government-in-exile in Taipei, governs Taiwan Penghu using the constitution drafted in Nanjing in 1946 and subsequently amended in Taipei; it has diplomatic relations with 12 countries. In Taiwan and its overseas offices, it presents itself as TAIWAN Republic of China and uses the ROC flag; when participating in international organizations and activities, it uses the name Chinese Taipei and the CT flag.
The essence and appearance of Taiwan after World War II: The land includes the main island of Taiwan, the outlying islands under the jurisdiction of the county and city governments of Taiwan, and Penghu; the population is mostly composed of Taiwanese people who were registered during the Japanese colonial period before World War II and their descendants; Taiwan once had a (provincial) government, but it was "frozen" in 1998 and all its business and personnel were transferred to the central government in 2018; no country currently has diplomatic relations with Taiwan; Taiwan has no flag as its appearance.
In 1955, the United States drew the median line of the Taiwan Strait, separating the last territories of the ROC (Kinmen and Matsu) from the Taiwan region (Taiwan and Penghu) which the ROC had occupied for decades, clearly informing the world that the ROC was not Taiwan. Therefore, the Taiwan authorities (ex-ROC) their followers cannot reunite the ROC and Taiwan through name rectification and constitutional reform due to their vastly different essence and appearances. To achieve the good fit of essence and appearance and gain international recognition, the ROC and its core group, the Chinese Revolutionary Party (KMT), should end their exile and return to Kinmen and Matsu; Taiwan and Penghu should establish a Taiwanese Government or a US Taiwan State Government. In this way, the CCP's ambition to annex Taiwan can be eliminated.
Taiwan (Formosa) International Volunteers Regiment 2026/07/22
|
|
Dear Honorable ________,
摘要：PRC以填海造陸的方法興建廈門市國際機場距離台海西側的金門縣只有3公里(1.864哩)。金門縣現在由台灣當局(流亡台北的ROC政府)管轄。美國須早日與Taiwan authorities商量並take over Taiwan (台灣本島及澎湖)以免Communist China併吞Taiwan。
--- 本質契合表象 ---
中共已經掌控台灣當局(ex-ROC)立法院，年度總預算及國防授權法仍被CCP控制的中國革命黨(KMT)及台灣人民黨(TPP)的立委阻擋。年底的期中選舉將屆，既然中共可介入美國選舉，台灣的選舉更不用說。為了台海安全，美國與台灣當局需要區分清楚台灣當局及ex-ROC。
中國共和國（Republic of China）於1950年流亡台北，到2026年已經流亡76年。經過軍事占領、戒嚴屠殺、白色恐怖、洗腦教育、民主轉型及非法選舉，現在總統府的官方網頁呈現「中華民國總統府 (10號小字) OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT REPUBLIC OF CHINA (TAIWAN)」。外交部的官網頁首呈現「中華民國外交部 Ministry of Foreign Affairs」；在其首頁最後呈現「Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of China (Taiwan), Taiwan (R.O.C.).」。這麼多名稱真使人們眼花撩亂。
ROC流亡政府佔據土地主權未定的台灣及澎湖，以不具國名的總統及立法委員選舉，其結果大多數知道國際法及慣例的國家並不承認其選舉結果。依據40多個二戰同盟國簽署於1952年生效的《對日本和平條約》，美國是台灣首要(principal)佔領政權。美國以公法《台灣關係法》與ROC流亡政府斷交，定義台灣是1979年之前的ROC。
美國與ROC斷交後，Taiwan (ex-ROC)對外表明身分所呈現的名稱列舉如下： 1. 在奧林匹克委會，Taiwan以Chinese Taipei名稱參加活動； 2. 在世界貿易組織，Taiwan以Chinese Taipei名稱加入會員； 3. 在邦交國的帛琉網頁，國家名稱呈現TAIWAN REPUBLIC OF CHINA，駐帛琉共和國大使館呈現 [Embassy of the Republic of China (Taiwan) in the Republic of Palau]； 4. 在斷交的美國網頁呈現 TAIWAN REPUBLIC OF CHINA 以及 駐美國台北經濟文化代表處(Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States)；and 5. 在海巡艦的兩側標明TAIWAN 海巡署 R. O. C. Coast Guard.
依據40多個二戰同盟國簽署於1952年生效的《對日本和平條約》，美國是台灣首要(principal)佔領政權。美國以公法《台灣關係法》與ROC流亡政府斷交，定義台灣是1979年之前的ROC。1996年之後ROC流亡政府在其領土(金門及馬祖)及其佔領區(台灣及澎湖)以不具國名的總統及立法委員選舉，其結果近200個國家並不承認。
當今ROC的本質及表象：領土僅剩金門及馬祖；人口組合大多數是二戰後的中國移民及其在台灣出生的後裔；政府是在台北的ROC流亡政府使用1946年在南京制定的憲法及在台北多次增修的憲法治理台灣及澎湖；有12個國家與ROC建交。在台灣及駐外單位以TAIWAN Republic of China 之名稱及ROC旗幟呈現其表象；參加國際組織及活動以Chinese Taipei之名稱及CT旗幟為其表象。
二戰後Taiwan的本質及表象：土地包括台灣本島、台灣縣市政府管轄的外島及澎湖；人口組合大多數是二戰前在日本殖民時期有戶籍登記的台灣人及其後代；台灣曾有(省)政府但已於1998年「凍省」並在2018年將所有業務與員額移交中央政府；目前沒有國家與台灣建交；台灣沒有任何旗幟為其表象。
美國1955年劃出台灣海峽中線區隔ROC最後的領土(金門及馬祖)與ROC已佔領數十年的台灣地區(台灣與澎湖)，明確告知全世界ROC不是Taiwan的事實。因此台灣當局(ex-ROC)及其附合者想要用正名與制憲的方法組合ROC與Taiwan因本質及表象差異巨大而不可行。為使本質及表象契合讓國際承認，ROC及其骨幹中國革命黨(KMT)應結束他們的流亡生涯，回去金門及馬祖；台灣及澎湖要成立台灣政府或美國台灣州政府。如此，當可消除中共併吞台灣的野心。
|
