Why Risk so Much for Kevin McCarthy?
We have limited cards to play, and playing one on Kevin is not a smart move.
Here’s the Chinese summary from ChatGPT
蔡英文總統的美國之行包括了與美國眾議院現任議長凱文·麥卡錫的潛在會面,這引發了關於該會面對台灣、美國和中國的影響的討論。作者認為,由於一系列原因,這次會面可能不是台灣的最佳選擇,例如:會面前的活動籌備匆忙,可能讓中國利用這次機會採取激進行為,以及麥卡錫可能無法在國會山莊確保台灣的廣泛支持,原因在於他的黨團內部動態。
取而代之,作者建議台灣可以考慮與其他曾表現出對台灣支持的美國政治要人進行替代會面。通過這樣做,台灣可以在避免與中國不必要的衝突的同時,繼續與美國建立緊密的關係。
Now read along if you are interested behind the reasons.
President Tsai Ing-Wen just embarked on a 10-day American visit, cheekily called “Meeting Democratic Partners, Fostering Shared Prosperity.” The trip will include visiting remaining diplomatic allies (Bye Honduras~) like Guatemala and Belize, but that’s not where the buzz is from. The whole world is fixating on the delegation’s air travel transit through New York and Los Angeles, and whether the president herself will meet with Kevin McCarthy, current Speaker of House of Representatives. China, of course, is threatening “resolute countermeasures” if the meet-up do take place.
You can view it as business as usual. Taiwan gets a photo-op with a top-ranking US official, China deploys some missiles and fighter jets near the Taiwanese Strait to posture, meanwhile officials from US Department of States solemnly say something ambiguous about One-China Policy. We tense up a bit, media personalities and military experts get some airtime, then things go back to normal. However, the business-as-usual-ness is itself a diplomatic achievement. Taiwan, US, and even China all participated in this interwoven diplomatic dance when there’s an event like leaders’ foreign trip (like this visit), military drill (think US-Philippines or China-North Korea), or global forums (such as G20, APAC). Each participant tries to pull the global status quo closer to its own interests by carefully deciding who to meet, crafting meticulously what statements and speeches to give, which military arsenal to brandish and deploy, or simply deciding whether or not to show up. These events are rare, precious, and hard to come by. Each one is an opportunity to play one’s diplomatic cards, to test the limit of allies and rivals, to redefine the new “business as usual.”
I think this trip by President Tsai is one of Taiwan’s rare, precious diplomatic moves in this global chess board, and I believe, wasting one on meeting Kevin McCarthy is a bad idea. As later paragraphs will explain, my reasons include the meeting being rushed, allowing China to keep up a pattern of aggressive behaviors, McCarthy himself not being able to ensure Taiwan’s broad support on US Capitol Hill, due to his rowdy caucus, and there being better candidates to meet, to demonstrate Taiwan’s value and might without giving China the opportunity to instigate conflicts.
The Meeting of Knee-Jerk Reflex
First of all, the events leading up to this meeting is haphazard to say the least. Nancy Pelosi, then House Speaker, decided to make the trip to Taiwan in late July 2022, despite concerns from the Biden Administration. Reporters then asked Kevin McCarthy, the House Republican leader and potential next Speaker of the House, if he wanted to visit Taiwan, and Kevin said yes. Come January after McCarthy was finally elected speaker after 14 failed votes (more on that later), there was rumblings about a McCarthy Taiwan trip and Pentagon’s preparation. Things didn’t go smoothly though. What followed was a stern China warning of retaliation if a second Speaker set foot on the island, and Tsai’s government convincing McCarthy to meet on US soil during Tsai’s American-diplomatic trip. It was reactive, from start to end, without proper preparation, without closely communicated diplomats from both sides setting this up.
The chaotic lead-up to this meeting aside, an undisputable fact is Kevin McCarthy do hold the Speaker Gavel. Taiwanese President meeting him certainly bring Taiwan global status and influence……right? Let’s analyze both symbolically and pragmatically.
Small Symbolic Win for Symbolic Payback
There’re symbolic and pragmatic effect for all political action. Harping back to the preciousness and rareness of Taiwan’s diplomatic chess moves, we want each move to advance the US-Taiwan alliance on the fronts of both symbolism and pragmatism.
McCarthy is indeed the current Speaker of the House, so we at least progress on the former part, however just a little bit IMAO (in my audacious opinion). There’re different levels to the speakership, some can control their caucus, some can’t. US readers don’t need me to elaborate on the evident difference of influence over their party members for McCarthy and Pelosi respectively. As for Taiwanese readers, let’s give an analogy with our own legislative members. On the left are legislative leaders who have been in congress since way before you’re alive, were influential even in the minority, and both stood on their own in a showdown with the executive branch; On the right are legislative leaders who are there, just there, following orders from their own 40-something-percentage-approval president and adrift in the tempestuous undercurrent of intraparty warfare.
So, on the symbolic side, it would be a photo-up with a not so powerful Speaker while exposing to the opponent a simple angle of retaliation. How about on the pragmatic side?
Pragmatic Bipartisanship, Theoretically
It seems even a skeptic like me can’t deny an obvious incentive of meeting with Kevin McCarthy, which is shoring up bipartisan congressional support for Taiwan in the US. Nancy Pelosi is a Democratic speaker, and Tsai met her, so now it’s time for meeting a Republican speaker, and bipartisan support will ensue. This theory sounds invincible, if not for the complicated, unintuitive, borderline inexplicable intraparty dynamics governing the Republicans. I will try my best to give my interpretation.
In US congress, there are members who staunchly believe in global outreach, focusing intently on supporting US allies; while some are proponents of a more nativistic approach, caring for US domestically first and not spending resources on inter-national affairs. In the middle however, there are a large swath of lawmakers between these two cliques, whose legislative priorities are not strictly about being a foreign political hawk or dove. I know my next generalization will anger some lawmakers since it loses nuance, but let’s oversimplify these three groups into Pro-Taiwan, Against-Taiwan, and Lukewarm-Taiwan. Remember, this classification applies to both parties. Now, we’ll try to analyze the interaction of them in both Democratic Party, blue, and Republican Party, red.
The blue side is more straightforward. When a bill related to Taiwan comes up, the Pro-Taiwan Democrats vote yes, the Against-Taiwan Democrats vote no, and the Lukewarm-Taiwan members will look for party leadership, which Nancy Pelosi is a part of, for guidance. Whether you view it as party unity or blind groupthink, the Lukewarm-Taiwan Democrats vote along the party “platform,” so Tsai meeting with Pelosi, showing democratic leadership’s support for Taiwan, strongly herds those lukewarm members into voting yes.
On the red side there exist a much more dramatic tug-of-war, the antagonistic relation between the “Establishment” and the “Grassroots.” The unintuitive part is that the definition of these two sides has over the years deviated from the name describing them. The “Grassroots” can be well-funded by wealthy donors, and the “Establishment” might just be an unresourceful Republican who triggered the ire of other party members. The Pro, Against, and Lukewarm distinguishment on different issues still exist, but they are all embroiled in this contentious war. Whether it’s explained by the media landscape, the party structure, or the manifestation of other socioeconomic phenomena, at the moment the political power of the Grassroots dominates the other side, so members don’t vote based on being pro or against the issue but doing everything they can to escape being pinned as the Establishments. Kevin McCarthy is at the frontline of this conflict, but he has no capability of swaying the battle. He received just enough establishment support without being relegated to political abyss, meanwhile effortfully negotiated grassroot support by partly giving Speaker’s power to prominent grassroot members. That’s why his speakership vote took 14 arduous turns to materialize, with 9 being the previous record in 1923.
Luckily, at the moment, the issue of Taiwan is not a conflict point of this gruesome conflict. But what if it became one? We look no further than another country stuck between the western democratic alliance and a strong autocratic power, Ukraine. One cruel reality of recent Republican politics is it always revolves around Donald J Trump. Unlike Kevin McCarthy, he is the eight-hundred-pound gorilla in this Republican civil war. A 2018 incident of then President Trump’s non-commitment to Ukrainian defense against Russia, which then sparked establishment backlash and the whole impeachment process, tore apart the previous overwhelmingly friendly relation between Republican congressional caucus and Ukraine. Members who supported Ukraine previously either held their mouth shut hoping to sneak through the storm or walked back their statement to escape the ire from Trump supporters, which consist of a majority part of the grassroot wing. Those who openly declared Trump is in the wrong mostly faced their political demise in the next election cycle. You might think US support to Ukraine is unwavering from global news headlines, but peeking into US politics you can see a more fragile consensus, with the bills of military aide to Ukraine being passed with a majority maintained by the alliance between Republican establishment, lukewarm democrats, and pro democrat. In my opinion, Taiwan is one Donald Trump scandal away to losing a big chunk of US congressional support. If this tragedy took place, Kevin McCarthy could do nothing but keep quiet his feelings toward Taiwan or even oppose Taiwan, trying to maintain enough support from establishment and grassroot side, just like now on other sensitive issues, to keep his speakership alive.
Other Much Better Meeting Candidates
So, we demonstrated meeting McCarthy is a tradeoff symbolically, and painstakingly went through the reasons that pragmatically, Tsai can’t ensure bipartisan support by meeting with the newly elected Speaker. However, there’s other options, other political figures Tsai could meet to, again, not waste this rare and precious diplomatic opportunity and score points both symbolically and pragmatically.
China has no clear response when congressional members visit the island and meet President Tasi, whether in the form of official delegation or individually. If meeting the House Speaker is not an option, how about other representatives or senators at prominent positions such as head of committees related to foreign affair. Michael Mcfaul, Gregory Meeks, Ed Markey, and Mitt Romney are all good options. Other options include a bipartisan group of senators who expressed support and introduced bills supporting Taiwan, such as Ron Wyden, Marco Rubio, Tom Cotton, and Sheldon Whitehouse are all good candidates. To further show our global strategic importance, how about an event with Ed Markey and John Cornyn, co-authors of the CHIPS act, in Arizona where billions of dollars are going to the construction of TSMC’s new foundry. Showing pragmatic bipartisan support and Taiwanese semiconductor prowess, at the same time, hitting Beijing where it hurts of it lacking advanced semiconductor technology.
The Hopeful Conclusion
I sincerely admire and appreciate you reading all the way to the end of this article. Despite the meeting between President Tsai and Speaker McCarthy now seems inevitable, I still feel optimistic nonetheless. This article is just me bringing awareness to the otherwise unnoticed US political dynamics and trying to provide information for us to make better decisions in the future. Hopefully, for both US or Taiwan readers, you can share this insight forward and together build a stronger alliance between US congressional members and Taiwan for the long run.