In an attempt to repair the damage after China was offended by the visit to Taipei of Lee Hsien Loong (李顯龍), Singaporean Foreign Minister George Yeo (楊榮文) criticized Taiwan independence in a speech in the UN General Assembly. The speech didn't get much of a response from Taiwanese media and politicians at the time.
Three days later, however, when Minister of Foreign Affairs Mark Chen (陳唐山) returned from the US, he responded to Yeo's criticism during a meeting with an organization from southern Taiwan. His use of a colloquial Taiwanese expression has been played up by some politicians and media outlets, who are now demanding his resignation.
Their reaction has been even fiercer than that of Chen's target, Singapore. This kind of topsy-turvy logic could only occur in Taiwan. But the reaction of these politicians and media was not due to their support or feelings for Singapore. Rather, it is because Singapore has become a spokesperson for China. This is why they so vigorously defend Singapore's anti-Taiwanese statements.
Their aim is to sow discord between Taiwan and Singapore in order to help China isolate Taiwan on the international stage.
Be it "snot" or "balls," such words must of course not enter the language of diplomacy, but it is not a big deal when they are used in a speech aimed at a domestic audience. Sensational reporting by the media, however, has made it seem as if these words were aimed at other countries, which makes it difficult [for Chen] to get off the hook.
But is this really a topic interesting enough to sustain several days of exaggerated media reporting? It is not very different from expressions in Mandarin or Cantonese meaning the same thing.
Although we should condemn Singapore's interference in Taiwan's domestic affairs in strong terms, there is no need to devote too much time and effort doing so, because we must also understand Singapore's position, which in some ways is similar to Taiwan's. First, China wants to annex Taiwan, and Singapore also risks annexation. China has always believed that the descendants of the Yellow Emperor must make up one China, and that there cannot be two Chinas or one China and one Taiwan. That of course also means that there cannot be one China and one Singapore either.
Second, if we are to follow China's "since-the-days-of-old" logic, then we should argue that the minuscule island of Singapore has been part of Malaysian territory "since the days of old." Singapore could only declare independence because of the interference of British colonialism. Doesn't that mean that if China can start a war to "liberate" Taiwan, Malaysia also has the right to start a war to annex Singapore?
It is in order to deal with this threat that Singapore is fawning over China -- it used to exhort Hong Kong not to oppose China, and now it is criticizing Taiwan for opposing China. Singapore shows such a lack of principle that it even allowed China to make whatever changes it wanted to the memoirs of "founding father" Lee Kuan Yew's (李光耀).
In this respect, Taiwan has retained more dignity than Singapore. Only Taipei's former deputy mayor, Pai Hsiou-hsiung (白秀雄), has had his speech manuscript changed by China -- ?during a visit to Shanghai. China has not, however, dared change speeches by former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). As the Chinese saying goes, only if you humiliate yourself will you be humiliated by others.
Although Singapore's leadership is currying favor with China without worrying about sacrificing the interests of Hong Kong and Taiwan, they of course also have a bottom line. For example, even though Singapore upholds "Asian values," the leadership is very clear in advocating that the US should maintain a military presence in Asia, because the US can protect Singapore from being annexed. Taiwan does not act in this way.
A few months ago, a Chinese tourist was humiliatingly treated as a prostitute by Singaporean authorities, seriously damaging the city-state's image. Looking to preserve calm in the overall situation, Taiwan did not exaggerate the incident. Now, however, Singapore requites this kindness with ingratitude to suck up to China.
If Singapore really is following Confucian teachings, it should remember the Confucian saying that "you should not do to others what you don't want done to yourself." Taiwan and Singapore should cooperate to avoid annexation by the regional hegemon.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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