Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
It may be hard to imagine now, but they used to vow to exterminate the "evil communist bandits." They justified keeping in place martial law and the autocratic regime that enriched them on the grounds of fighting communism.
Now, in total disregard for the nation's overall interests and security, they compete to be the first to pay their respects to the "bandits," and take pride in becoming guests of the communist regime. It is truly hard to have any respect for people who exhibit such an ugly, opportunistic side of human nature.
In view of opposition leaders' China fever, the Central Standing Committee of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) on Tuesday passed a resolution on visits to China by political parties. The resolution makes a point of highlighting "three oppositions" and "three musts."
The resolution passed by the DPP fully represents the mainstream popular will and aligns with the stance that the independent sovereignty of Taiwan cannot be changed by external forces. This resolution also gives cautious advice to the opposition leaders, while rejecting the 10-point consensus reached between Soong and President Chen Shui-bian (
Unfortunately, while the DPP has taken a strong stance through the resolution, the Presidential Office has adopted a policy of treating Lien and Soong differently, by criticizing the former but not the latter. It sternly condemned Lien for making the trip to China, but it spoke about Soong in kind words, saying that he is going to China with the 10-point consensus reached between him and Chen. That consensus is in writing and signed by the two. From this perspective, Soong can of course represent the position outlined in the consensus.
To attack Lien but not Soong may be a strategy deployed by the Presidential Office to divide the pan-blue opposition. However, on issues that relate to national security and fundamental interests, it is most important to be principled. Since the visits to China by opposition leaders are harmful to Taiwan's interests, the government should treat everyone equally in accordance with the law and make no distinction between the opposition leaders.
Everyone who deserves moral condemnation should be condemned, with no exceptions made. KMT Vice Chairman Chiang Ping-kun (
But Soong will get immunity because he holds a piece of paper that contains the 10-point consensus with Chen -- and therefore he's free to be wined and dined by China's "communist bandits." How can the government ease the confusion over this different treatment of Lien and Soong?
The reasons why the two sides of the Taiwan Strait cannot negotiate are that politically, China has the ambition to engulf Taiwan, while economically it has adopted a policy of luring Taiwanese capital, industries, talent and technologies, in an attempt to pull out the roots of industrial development established in Taiwan over the past decades.
The autocratic nature of the Chinese regime is at odds with Taiwan's free democracy. Moreover, China is rapidly improving its military prowess, while remaining adamant about using force against Taiwan. In other words, China is the only enemy to Taiwan's sovereignty. And in terms of economic development, China is Taiwan's biggest competitor.
Faced with such an enemy and competitor, the core of Taiwan's cross-strait policy should be self-protection, to ensure that the roots of its economic development are not pulled away, political democracy and freedoms are not obstructed, and the national sovereignty is not violated.
If these are the goals, then Taiwan should obviously keep a safe distance from China. The visits of the opposition leaders to China, whether authorized by the government or not, and regardless of any 10-point consensus Chen may have signed, are inappropriate.
China's unification campaign has becoming increasingly flexible in its strategy. On the one hand it enacted a harsh Anti-Secession Law to threaten Taiwan. On the other hand, it warms up to Lien and Soong, thereby sandwiching the government with pressure both within and outside Taiwan. If the government continues to treat Lien and Soong differently, it will fall into Beijing's death trap.
It's hard not to question Soong's and Lien's personal agendas in making these trips. Lien has so far been defeated in two presidential elections. He is also about to step down as KMT chairman. This trip to China seems to have become the one last major gamble of Lien's career -- a longshot attempt at a political comeback.
Soong also suffered two major defeats. The political party he founded, the PFP, has experienced major ups and downs. Therefore, he may hope to open up a new career path for himself by aligning with Chen and shuttling between the two sides of the Strait.
Precisely because politicians such as Lien and Soong are washed up has-beens, when China issued invitations to them in the name of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and party Secretary-general Hu Jintao (
Lien and Soong claim to be making pilgrimages to China for magnanimous purposes, such as pushing for cross-strait peace, striking a deal by which China will agree not use force against Taiwan as long as Taiwan does not declare independence, and negotiating the withdrawal of China's missiles.
These are nothing but lies. The only purpose being served is an attempt to advance their own exhausted political careers. These trips will not serve Taiwanese people's interests. The government should reiterate its stance and caution Lien and Soong to assume full responsibility for the outcome of their trips.
They must not be allowed to sacrifice the interests of the 23 million people of Taiwan on the altar of their own outsized egos.
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
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
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
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
RSS