So it's been made official. There will be charter flights serving Taiwanese businessmen during the upcoming Lunar New Year. This time around, carriers from both sides of the Taiwan Strait will participate in providing two-way and non-stop flights between multiple Chinese and Taiwanese international airports. Equally, if not even more noteworthy, is the model of negotiation adopted, adding a third option to the models for cross-strait talks.
Both the Chinese and Taiwanese governments sent government officials to Macau for yesterday's negotiation, although they went in "unofficial" capacities. From the Taiwan side, Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA) director-general Billy Chang (
This model of negotiation is somewhat akin to the so-called "2002 Taiwan-Hong Kong model" of aviation negotiations, under which representatives from the private sectors were joined by aviation government officials from both sides who participated in non-official capacities. The difference is that in that round of negotiations officials from the Mainland Affairs Counsel (MAC) also joined the negotiations in an "unofficial" capacity.
As for the model that was used to initiate cross-strait negotiations in talks between Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) chairman Koo Chen-fu (
Actually, the two sides gradually and tactfully reached consensus about the substantive model of the air links before yesterday's talks. The significance of the talks in Macau were not only to make the deal official, but also in the model of negotiation established. Many believe that this latest model of negotiations may very well be the model used for talks on more permanent cross-strait direct links.
Indeed, this model is the bottom line beyond which the Taiwan government must not go. Any further concessions risk reducing cross-strait talks to negotiations over "domestic affairs." While the government officials involved in negotiations went in "unofficial" capacities, they were government officials nonetheless. These aviation talks, practically speaking, cannot proceed without officials' involvement to begin with, since none of the issues being discussed can possibly be decided by members of the private sector. This demonstrates that cross-strait links are in reality international links and not domestic links. As for the flight routes agreed on yesterday, they are in fact international air routes from Chinese cities to Hong Kong and then from Hong Kong to Taiwan. In this regard, the Taiwan government has not compromised the public interest.
The charter flights for the upcoming Lunar New Year are significant for several other reasons. Unlike in the 2003 flights, Chinese air carriers will also participate, passengers can board from both ends (the Taiwan side as well as the Chinese side), and the flights will be uninterrupted, meaning there will be no transit stops in either Hong Kong or Macau, although planes will pass through airspace of one of the territories. And for the first time ever, there will be Chinese aircraft bearing the People's Republic of China flag embarking and landing in Taiwan's airports.
While both the Chinese and Taiwan government claim that the charter flights are isolated cases tailored to serve Taiwanese businessmen, the question on everyone's mind is nevertheless this: Will cross-strait direct links be made official soon? However, the question that the Taiwan government should really ask itself is this: Is it ready to face up and deal with the potential problems of such official direct links?
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS