On Wednesday, Zhang Mingqing (
Missile exercises during the 1996 campaign; saber-rattling comments by then-premier Zhu Rongji (
This year, enraged by President Chen Shui-bian's (
Then there is the fact that Beijing has turned a blind eye to the recent grand opening of a pan-blue campaign headquarters in Shanghai -- which, coincidentally, is right next to the Taiwan Affairs Office building. It is hard to believe that Beijing didn't know what was going on -- after all, Chinese authorities keep a tight leash on all political activities. How could Beijing not have realized that a group of Taiwanese businesspeople -- many of whom are not only wanted fugitives in Taiwan but are well connected with high-ranking Chinese officials -- were establishing a campaign office?
On Wednesday, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Wen-chung (
Even more interesting is the way the Taiwan Affairs Office was so quick to deny any attempt to meddle in the election, and the Shanghai authorities' ban on campaigning after the KMT came under attack in Taiwan for its election-related activities in China. Since when has Beijing ever cared about criticism from Taiwan? The only possible explanation is that it does not want to be seen to be doing anything that might negatively impact Lien's campaign. Under the circumstances, despite the pan-blue's denials, it is obvious that Beijing favors Lien.
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics