时论广场》蔡政府在许下外交愿望之前，小心点！（方恩格Ross Darrell Feingold）

（图/Brookings Institution）

英语中有一句谚语：「Be careful what you wish for.」中文大概的意思是警告我们要小心动念、谨慎许愿。最近看到美国国会推出的一些友台草案时，这句话不断出现在我的脑海。

其中有项草案禁止美国国务院拨款制作、采购或展示任何将台湾、金门、马祖、澎湖、乌坵、绿岛以及兰屿等地描绘为属于中华人民共和国领土的地图 。鉴于上述地区的行政管辖权从未属于中华人民共和国，美国国务院需要使用符合现实的地图。然而该草案却未囊括许多争议中的南海、东沙群岛、太平岛、钓鱼台等岛屿。

即使目前台湾有许多的称呼方式可供选择，像是中华民国、中华民国自由地区、中华民国（台湾）或者中华民国台湾等，该草案很可惜也并未要求美国国务院在地图上以特定方式来标明这些岛屿所属。

另一项「台湾学人法」（Taiwan Fellowship Act）是要在美国创建一个台湾奖学金计划。在其中拟议推动台美行政部门的合作计划中，包括了美国的台湾对应窗口将可获得在台湾政府机构工作或交流实习的机会。或许进口美国人力可以帮助台湾在公部门服役的替代役人员们分担一些工作、减轻他们的辛劳。

对美国人而言，台湾到底有多神秘而充满异国风情，需要让美国纳税人和美国政府花上更多的资源来帮助美国人更了解台湾？这让我回想起美国在60年代大力推动的国际和平队（Peace Corps），当时美国政府大力奖励青年到东南亚、中南美洲、非洲展开社会与经济援助的活动。现在的台湾具备了世界数一数二先进的科技以及教育水准，要让台湾走入世界、加深国际对台湾的认知，却使用50年前美国援助第三世界国家的方法，这样的做法真的能实际帮助到台湾吗？

事实上，台湾的外交部已经有为外国学者开办一个名为「台湾奖助金（Taiwan Fellowship）」的奖助条款，获得这个奖助金者会得到台湾政府的资助、在台湾进行研究或教学，其中也不少人经常在外语媒体或出版品中为台湾政府发声。不知道台湾的驻美代表处有没有告诉过美国推案的友台众议员，他们草案与台湾现有条款撞名了？

就笔者观察，台湾中央和地方政府机构兴致勃勃不断在寻求外国支持，但完全忽略了在台湾也有一群外国居民可以帮助他们增强台湾的国际形象，这符合一个在台湾流行的文化现象：「外销转内销」，像是台湾媒体喜欢引用外国媒体报导台湾的正面消息，带回国内帮助台湾人形塑出国人眼中的国际形象。

比起可能被派来台湾公部门出差交流之后就回国的外国政府机关人员，要增进台湾的外交关系，长期住在台湾的外国居民或许能贡献更多。但在近来的政府举措之中，身在当地的外国居民通常不是焦点所在。

台湾的外国居民绝对是增强台湾外交软实力的一把交椅，可惜台湾政府官员常常忽略这一点。举例来说，在师大国语文中心学过中文的许多外国朋友们成立了一个全球校友会，当我在学中文时，我们这群校友努力寻求学校与台湾政府的支持。有鉴于许多校友是继续留在台湾或在世界各地的专业人士与学者，这个社群是一个对于台湾的国际形象、产业合作的好资源。然而对于我们的自荐，只得到学校官方口头上支持回应，并无实质成效。当我与当时的台湾驻美代表相关人士会面时，我向他提出一些建议、推荐了一些优秀校友（我并没有向他寻求经济支助），但我得到的回应是：「如果我们向贵校友会提供任何支援，那么全台湾其他的中文学校也都会来找我们提供相关帮助。」我当时其实想回他：台湾政府应该要提拔这些想要主动为台湾做事的国立大学的校友们，但面对他斩钉截铁表示没有兴趣，我吞回了原本想继续争辩的话语。

另一项草案「台湾外交检讨法案」（Taiwan Diplomatic Review Act）将要求未来美国在台协会处长的任命程序，应比照一般美国驻外大使的程序，需要美国参议院实行同意权。乍听之下这似乎提升了美国驻台协会处长的地位，也让许多希望寻求美国支援的台湾支持者感到高兴，但笔者认为可能不需要高兴得太早。首先，这一措举并不代表我们离台美建交更近一步；其次，在美国参议院听证会期间，被提名人最多也只能用最保守的论点来回答参议员所有关于美台关系的问题。

新任美国驻台协会处长刚上任，这意味着此草案就算明天通过，也至少要等到3年之后才开始施行。实际上，这样的情况常常会遇到前一任与新一任的外交官任期之间会有缺口，由于要经过行政程序，新任的大使未上任之前、前任的大使已经离任，这时候总是需要暂代此职位缺口的人来代理。目前台湾的情况是美国政府可以在不需要国会通过的情况下选择驻台办事处处长一职，所以并不会遇到这个问题，但若使用了新法案，台湾将放弃一个独特的待遇。

抱持着「人家都是这样」的信念，台湾一直企图在与外国交手时追求「平等」待遇，像是大力批判世界卫生组织又同时吵着要加入其组织，大量洒钱来进行金援外交，或高兴着台湾没有被世界卫生组织所推出的全球新冠肺炎疫苗实施计划（COVAX）排除在接收捐赠疫苗的名单上，但笔者认为要是台湾能奋力争取让自己身处在购买名单上，会显得更有骨气。

或许台湾应该更专注在发展自己的软实力、以自身优势找到属于自己的国际地位、发挥优势，而不是「因为其他国都有，我们也要」这种心态在挣扎。毕竟，各国之间的外交脉络不尽相同，许愿不要乱许，毕竟生搬硬套，许多结果不一定符合台湾实际的需要。

（作者为美国共和党海外部亚太区前主席）

全文：

Be Careful What You Wish For in Foreign Policy

By Ross Darrell Feingold

Former Asia Chairman Republicans Abroad

In English there is a saying “Be careful what you wish for.” This was on my mind while reading about some recent bills in the United States Congress that are intended to strengthen the already excellent bilateral relations between the United States and Taiwan.

One item prohibits the Department of State from using its funding “to create procure or display any map that depicts Taiwan Kinmen Matsu Penghu Wuciou Green Island or Orchid Island as part of the territory of the People’s Republic of China.” Given that the People’s Republic of China has never exercised jurisdiction over the named islands it is only logical that the State Department use maps that accurately depict current realities. However the bill omits how State Department maps should refer to islands in the South China Sea to which the Republic of China claims sovereignty and are currently under Taiwan’s control as well as the many other islands claimed by the Republic of China in the South China Sea and the Diaoyutai in the East China Sea that are currently not under Taiwan’s control. The bill also does not require the State Department’s maps to refer to these islands in a specific way whether as the Republic of China the Free Area of the Republic of China the Republic of China (Taiwan) or the Republic of China Taiwan (or any other designation for the country’s name that the current Taiwan government prefers).

Another proposal would create a Taiwan Fellowship program funded by US taxpayers. Among the more interesting parts of the proposed program’s structure the Taiwan Fellows from the United States would spend time working in Taiwan government agencies. Perhaps young men working in government agencies as part of Taiwan’s alternative national service program are over worked and Americans need to be imported!

Is Taiwan such a mysterious and exotic place that the US taxpayer and US government must spend more resources to assist Americans to learn more about it? Taiwan is one of the wealthiest and most technologically sophisticated countries in the world; if there are shortcomings in the world’s knowledge about Taiwan it should be the responsibility of the Taiwan government and people in the first instance to address this.

In fact the Ministry of Foreign Affairs already operates a program called the Taiwan Fellowship for foreign scholars whose recipients receive a Taiwan taxpayer funding to do research or teach in Taiwan (and some of whom then publish commentaries and books in foreign languages that not surprisingly reflect the Taiwan government’s views). Perhaps the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in Washington DC should let the United States Congress know this in order to avoid confusion.

In this author’s experience a recurring problem with Taiwan central and local government agencies is to be over exuberant for foreign support but only when it comes from foreigners who live outside Taiwan (this is one aspect of what is known in Taiwan as “overseas marketing turned into domestic marketing”). Often the foreign residents of Taiwan are overlooked in these initiatives even those foreigners who currently live in Taiwan are better ambassadors for bilateral relations with their home countries than foreigners who might come here for one or two years and then move on to other non-Taiwan related activities. In my own career in Taiwan both in professional and community activities I have repeatedly encountered government officials who are unable to appreciate this and rejected proposals for initiatives that would better utilize the soft power of Taiwan’s resident foreigners. By way of example over twenty years along with many other foreigners who had studied Mandarin at the National Taiwan Normal University Mandarin Training Center we sought support from the school as well as the Taiwan government to create a global alumni association. Given that many alumni remain to work in Taiwan (and others went on to work worldwide in government and industry) this was a ready to be utilized group of foreigners with a strong connection to Taiwan. The reaction from the school was verbally supportive but short on substance (and the frequent changes to the Mandarin Training Center’s director made continuity difficult). I also met with the head of the cultural division at the TECRO in Washington DC to seek moral (though not financial support) and was told that if we provide any assistance to you we’ll have to do it for every Mandarin language school in Taiwan. My reply was that the Taiwan government should not discriminate against the alumni from a particular national university who are taking the initiative to do something for Taiwan but in reality I gave up.

Another bill in Congress would require that the American Institute in Taiwan Taipei Office director be confirmed by the United States Senate just as any other United States ambassador to a foreign country is. At first glance this seems like a good idea and it is something Taiwan supporters in the United States have long sought though there are several reasons why this might not be a good idea at this time. Most importantly it is not diplomatic recognition. When confirmation hearings occur the nominee is sure to reply to senators questions about US-Taiwan relations with the same kind of “bureaucratic speak” as other State Department and Defense Department nominees do in their confirmation hearings. A new director just arrived in Taipei which means the use of the law would have to wait at least three years. On a practical level ambassadors are sometimes nominated and then confirmed after the predecessor has departed the post. Is Taiwan be better off with an “open window” during which there is only an acting Taipei office director?

But perhaps most importantly Taiwan would give up a unique status (that the US government can select the Taipei office director without the need for a Senate confirmation hearing) in return for a momentary sense of happiness when the bill passes into law and a momentary sense of happiness in the future when the confirmation hearings for a new Taipei office director occur. Is this trade worth it? Instead Taiwan and its supporters should have advocated for a more prominent person from outside the foreign service to be selected for the post similar to the US ambassadors that a new US president nominates for ambassadorships to countries such as China and the United Kingdom. Although the recent and new Taipei office directors are well qualified it is not the same as a political nominee personally acquainted to the president of the United States and the absence of nomination hearings might make the opportunity attractive to political appointees. Unfortunately in its foreign policy Taiwan often seeks equal treatment simply because it is what other countries also do; examples include attempts to join discredited international organizations (such as the United Nations and World Health Organization) maintain diplomatic relations with corrupt governments who steal Taiwan aid money or to participate in COVAX as a recipient of vaccine donations (rather than only be a purchaser). Perhaps Taiwan would be better off finding ways to use its unique status to its advantage rather than simply trying to be like everyone else. After all countries also should be careful what they wish for.