Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) chairman Koo Chen-fu (辜振甫) passed away yesterday at the age of 88. Koo's life was closely linked to Taiwan's political history. He was an influential player in every significant change over the years, and left his mark not only on himself and his family, but on Taiwan as well.
Koo was the last of Taiwan's aristocracy, and his death brings an end to the so-called "Koo-Wang talks" with Wang Daohan (汪道涵), chairman of the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS).
The Koo family of Lukang has been arguably the most influential family in Taiwan over the past century. Koo's father, Koo Hsien-jung (辜顯榮), made a fortune in commerce when Taiwan was still under Japanese control, then Koo Chen-fu cooperated with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) on their land-reform programs shortly after they came to Taiwan, and was made head of Taiwan Cement Corp.
As Taiwan's economy developed, his group not only continued to expand, it also moved into cutting-edge industries, diversifying from cement into life insurance, banking, multi-media and telecommunications -- thus showing how sensitive the entrepreneur was to changes in society and the economy. Although members of the Koo family have gone their different ways, Koo Chen-fu's Taiwan Cement and the Koos Group continue to maintain a good relationship with Chinatrust, owned by his nephew, Jeffrey Koo (
Although Koo was an unparalleled business leader, he also played a major role in politics. He was, for many years, chairman of the Chinese National Association of Industry and Commerce, and acted as the government's ambassador-at-large. On many occasions he attended APEC summit meetings in the capacity of special representative to the president.
Koo is probably best known for his contributions to cross-strait relations and the "Koo-Wang talks" of 1993, which played an important role in breaking the ice between China and Taiwan. The 1993 talks in Singapore resulted in the signing of four agreements establishing a formal cross-strait relationship. A second round of talks was held in 1998 in Shanghai and a third round was scheduled for Taipei, but was called off by China to protest former president Lee Teng-hui's (
Before the 1993 Koo-Wang talks, negotiations in 1992 between the SEF and ARATS in Hong Kong came to a vague understanding to bypass otherwise insurmountable differences of opinion in the lead-up to the Singapore talks. This meant that the agreement was nothing more than an oral declaration, opening up an endless controversy as to whether a "one-China consensus" was reached. Such ambiguity must have caused Koo regret in his capacity as SEF chairman.
Upon hearing of Koo's passing, China's Taiwan Affairs Office announced that it was willing to negotiate an agreement for direct charter flights over the Lunar New Year. The Mainland Affairs Council responded to the offer, opening the door to negotiations. This offers a glimmer of hope in the blanket of darkness brought on by China's proposed "anti-secession" law, but is hardly enough to suggest a thaw in the now icy cross-strait relationship.
But the animosity and coldness between the two sides is causing both parties to become detached from reality. With Koo's passing, we think back to the time when the SEF and ARATS built a bridge across the Strait. That was a time when hope was greater than enmity. A new era of cross-strait negotiations must begin.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
After “Operation Absolute Resolve” to capture former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, the US joined Israel on Saturday last week in launching “Operation Epic Fury” to remove Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his theocratic regime leadership team. The two blitzes are widely believed to be a prelude to US President Donald Trump changing the geopolitical landscape in the Indo-Pacific region, targeting China’s rise. In the National Security Strategic report released in December last year, the Trump administration made it clear that the US would focus on “restoring American pre-eminence in the Western hemisphere,” and “competing with China economically and militarily