Diplomatic niceties often occur within what can only be called the theater of the absurd, an observation that is probably lost on most of its practitioners.
A perfect example of such absurdity is the ongoing discussion among EU governments about ending an embargo on arms sales to Beijing so that sales might resume by June.
While such behavior is common to conventional diplomacy, it also reveals a deep hypocrisy. Most of the same countries systematically repudiate Taiwan's democratically-elected leadership while rewarding Beijing's autocrats.
The EU ban on arms sales was imposed after the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989. There is little evidence that any safeguards have been put in place since that time to prevent such an incident from happening again.
A cynical sacrificing of support for human rights on the altar of commerce has therefore benefited European companies with interests in arms sales.
No doubt EU officials were pleased to hear that Beijing expects to increase its defense spending by 12 percent, although the actual amount is widely believed to be higher. Part of this would fund the annual increase of about 100 ballistic missiles to add to the estimated 700 targeting Taiwan.
Such unprincipled behavior contradicts the impression that European governments support freedom, democracy and individual rights.
However, this is not the first time that the EU has shamed itself. A few years back, EU functionaries in Brussels nixed a proposed visa for President Chen Shui-bian (
This time, however, the decision to lift the arms embargo would threaten world peace and contribute to political instability in the Asia-Pacific region.
While the EU is committed to free movement of goods and services or financial capital within Europe and elsewhere, it does not permit the presence of law-abiding, freely-elected politicians from Taiwan.
Tragically and ironically, terrorists travel more easily in the EU than Taiwanese officials.
Beijing is notorious for bringing diplomatic pressure to bear in its relentless attempt to isolate Taiwan.
It is well known that China's participation and support for international conferences or organizations is conditional on rejecting the participation of Taiwan's leadership.
However, the most blame should go to those spineless politicians and diplomats that collapse under such pressure.
Such shameful behavior is an insult to Taiwan's citizens who have taken so many risks to express their commitment to democracy and freedom.
A peaceful transfer of power after five decades of single-party rule in May 2000 made Taiwan the first democracy in the history of ethnically Chinese societies.
Taiwan deserves to be recognized by the global community for promoting the ideals of economic freedom, democracy and peace.
Chen has been an indefatigable supporter of freedom and democracy. As political leader of the first party dedicated to democracy in Taiwan, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), Chen was a strong advocate of human rights. His party won an election that bloodlessly brought an end to the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) monopoly on power.
Since then, Taipei has offered to negotiate in good faith with the unelected officials in Beijing to promote peace and political harmony.
However, this is being undertaken with a steadfast desire to maintain Taiwan's admirable democratic achievements.
Many countries require that visas be denied to Taiwan's top five political figures.
The president, vice president, premier, foreign minister and defense minister cannot visit countries that supposedly share their belief in freedom and democracy.
But ending the ban on selling arms to Beijing would constitute a more serious compromising of these cherished principles.
The English say that "the law is an ass" when talking about laws that violate common sense. Much worse must be said of the supposed delicacies of diplomacy that mask hypocrisy.
Travel bans are an affront to the dignity of Taiwanese citizens. But if the EU caves in to Beijing's requests for lethal military hardware, the hypocrisy and venality of the EU could have deadly consequences. European corporate profits should not be allowed to trump the aspirations of a people that has fought so hard for freedom.
Christopher Lingle is visiting professor of economics at Universidad Francisco Marroquin in Guatemala.
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