Diplomacy is often a theater of the absurd, except to its practitioners. A perfect example of this is the hearty congratulations and uncritical commentary following the rubberstamped approval by China's parliament of Wen Jiabao (
Such behavior smacks both of hypocrisy and cowardice when you consider that most of the same leaders refuse visits from Taiwan's democratically-elected leader, President Chen Shui-bian (
Statements by a Belgian government spokesman indicate that the decision to refuse his visa had the full backing of all EU members and the European Commission. Such unprincipled behavior contradicts a false impression that European governments support freedom, democracy and individual rights. Perhaps this should not be surprising since members of the European Commission are themselves not elected through democratic means.
Despite the hectoring by EU officials to encourage the free movement of goods and services or financial capital within Europe and elsewhere, they are unwilling to allow law-abiding people to travel freely. It is tragic and ironic fact that terrorists have been able to travel more easily than have democratically-elected politicians from Taiwan.
Refusal by EU foreign ministers of a visa for Chen involved explicit kowtowing to Beijing. It appears that the refusal to issue a visa would breach the "one China" policy of the EU. While there are deep divisions over some foreign policy issues, EU members present a united front in their dealings with China.
But their policy toward Taiwan is less clear. Last week the European Commission opened a trade office in Taipei after several years of negotiations. Yet this followed the opening of a similar office in another of the last remaining outposts of communism, Cuba. And its caudillo and long-serving unelected leader, Fidel Castro, visits Europe with few restrictions.
Beijing is notorious for bringing diplomatic pressures to bear in a relentless pursuit of the isolation of Taiwan. It is well known that China's participation and support for international conferences or organizations is conditional on rejecting the participations of Taiwan's leadership. However, the most blame should go to those spineless politicians and diplomats that collapse under those pressures.
Such shameful behavior is an insult to Taiwan's citizens who have taken so many risks to express their commitment to democracy and freedom. A peaceful transfer of power after five decades of single-party rule in May 2000 made Taiwan the first democracy in the history of ethnic Chinese societies.
And Chen has been an indefatigable supporter of freedom and democracy in Taiwan. He served on a team of defense attorneys for activists arrested in the "Kaohsiung Incident," that set the stage for an effective political opposition to the single-party control of the KMT and the end of 40 years of martial law.
As political leader of the first party dedicated to democracy in Taiwan, the DPP, Chen was a strong advocate of human rights. Since his election, he has negotiated in good faith with the unelected officials in Beijing to promote peace and political harmony, while steadfastly refusing to compromise Taiwan's admirable democratic achievements.
Unofficial rules require denying visas, even for private reasons, to the top five of Taiwan's political figures. As such the president, vice president, premier, foreign minister, and defense minister are not able to visit countries that supposedly share their belief in freedom and democracy.
Apparently, EU officials are willing to compromise on what should be their most cherished principles of freedom, democracy and human rights. An expression among the English has it that "the law is an ass." If this be so, much worse must be said of the supposed delicacies of diplomacy.
Christopher Lingle is professor of economics at Universidad Francisco Marroquin in Guatemala and global strategist for eConoLytics.com.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS