The Chinese government released a statement on the Taiwan issue after midnight on May 16. Since the statement was authorized by the government, and was issued so close to President Chen Shui-bian's (
The speech shows the carrot and the stick approach, as it included hardline principles and threats as well as flexible and pragmatic suggestions. It was not necessarily "an unprecedented severe threat to Taiwan," as the opposition camp claimed.
The statement repeatedly attacked Chen's "five noes" principle accusing him of lacking honesty and credibility, firmly insisting on the "one China" principle while refusing to tolerate Taiwan's independence. From this perspective, whether Chen would mention the "five noes" again in his speech was not a concern to Beijing anymore. Nevertheless, the statement did not mention the "one country, two systems" policy either. Although it insisted on the "one China" principle, it did not specify the concrete content of this principle. This time, Beijing's conditions for cross-strait development were not based on Taipei's acceptance of the "one China" principle. Instead, the statement simplified Chinese Vice Premier Qian Qichen's (
Among the seven suggestions in the statement, the first suggestion vacuously but positively responded to Chen's call for building a "peace and stability framework." Apart from the old issue of the opening of cross-strait links, Beijing also added the negotiation of Taiwan's international survival space and closer economic cooperation on the basis of reciprocity.
The seven suggestions were not necessarily all good for Taiwan. Still, changes such as preliminary recognition of Chen's "peace and stability framework" and the mention of Taiwan's need for international space had positive meanings. This shows that US Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly's statements that the US "continues to urge Beijing and Taipei to pursue dialogue as soon as possible through any available channels" and "the US continues to be a strong supporter of Taiwan's participation in international organizations" affected the attitudes of Chinese President Hu Jintao (
The statement was the most important message since the new leadership took control of Taiwan affairs in January, and its content varied from Jiang's eight points. The attacks on Chen's honesty and credibility, as well as the insistence on the "one China" principle, satisfied the demands of the hawks. On the other hand, the changes demonstrated the pragmatic components of China's thinking on Taiwan, showing that Hu and Wen have noted that "Taiwan recognition" has become a mainstream value, and that it's necessary to deal with the issue pragmatically. The statement was also a positive response to Kelly's words. The statement shows that although Beijing is not too optimistic about the cross-strait issue, the situation is not hopeless.
Lai I-chung directs foreign policy studies at the Taiwan Thinktank.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the