China's "Anti-Secession" Law was one of the key issues for US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's two-day visit to Beijing. During a meeting with Rice on Sunday, Chinese President Hu Jintao (
Superficially, the two countries appeared equally matched in the meeting, but in fact, China had the upper hand, as it had already passed a law legitimizing in its own mind its threat of war against Taiwan. That law has shifted the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. In requesting that Beijing make efforts to reduce cross-strait tension, Washington was merely trying to remedy a situation that existed. There is no guarantee that Beijing will take up this proposal, so clearly Hu came off better in the talks.
When the 10th National People's Congress passed the law on March 14, Premier Wen Jiabao (
Taiwan opposes the law simply because it compels compliance with Beijing's will. This flies in the face of democracy and freedom. The violation of such fundamental values can never be counterbalanced by material interests.
Rice had the means of persuading China to reduce cross-strait tensions at her disposal, but she failed to make use of the opportunity. The means are the themes of "freedom" and "democracy" that figured so prominently in US President George W. Bush's second inauguration speech. The disparity between Taiwan and China is not only a question of incomes and quality of life, but one of values, beliefs and systems of government. This difference cannot be made to disappear through the use of guns, battleships or missiles.
The gulf that separates Taiwan and China cannot be spanned unless China is willing to undertake political reform that will give its people greater political rights, create a democratic government and resolve its social problems concurrently with its efforts to continue its economic development.
Since the passage of the "Anti-Secession" Law, antipathy and suspicion of China among the people of Taiwan has increased. Taiwan's anxiety about China can only be reduced if the Beijing leadership is prepared to show respect for Taiwan's existence, introduce measures that guarantee its security and enhance the prosperity of Taiwan's society. For example, they could stop blocking Taiwan efforts to join the World Health Organization as an observer and sign free-trade agreements with other countries. This would pave the way toward cross-straits negotiations founded on equality.
Taiwan's perception of the "one country, two systems" model has been a negative one. The departure of Hong Kong's former chief executive Tung Chee-hwa (
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
On the eve of the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) made a statement that provoked unprecedented repudiations among the European diplomats in Taipei. Chu said during a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that what President William Lai (賴清德) has been doing to the opposition is equivalent to what Adolf Hitler did in Nazi Germany, referencing ongoing investigations into the KMT’s alleged forgery of signatures used in recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators. In response, the German Institute Taipei posted a statement to express its “deep disappointment and concern”