Vice President Lien Chan (
How refreshing it is, therefore, to see Lien break the mold by suggesting a bold and incisive policy move on the cross-strait front -- especially when it seems that independent presidential candidate James Soong (
What Lien has proposed is not so much a change in policy or strategy as a change in the presentation of Taiwan's position in the cross-strait debate. It is, in effect, the creation of a clever new public relations slogan: respect for human rights is higher than respect for sovereignty. In other words, respect for Taiwan's human rights should be higher than respect for China's claim to sovereignty over Taiwan.
This is obviously going to have an effect on politicians around the world, coming as it does in the wake of NATO's successful intervention in Kosovo. Can US President Bill Clinton, for one, ask the American public to condone an intervention on the grounds of human rights in Yugoslavia but not in the Taiwan Strait? Human rights are universal, after all, and the US has been a champion of the cause throughout the world. It is also a cause that is much easier for the international community to identify with, and more convenient for its leaders to exploit for their own public relations purposes. Better, certainly, than taking sides in a murky PRC-ROC sovereignty dispute that traces its origins to a civil war which took place half a century ago.
True enough, as Lien's critics have been quick to point out, this still leaves Taiwan at the mercy of fickle public opinion in the West. But it makes Taiwan's case much easier to sell abroad. And it does not supersede the argument that Taiwan's sovereignty rests with its people -- if anything, the new slogan is complementary: Taiwan's sovereignty is strengthened by its people's desire to uphold their human rights.
Soong, on the other hand, seems determined to cast himself as the great compromiser in cross-strait affairs and, by so doing, is creating the impression in international circles that Taiwan is prepared to enter into negotiations on its sovereignty -- however long-term they may be. This is something which no demo-cratic nation would ever willingly do. Yet by suggesting that Taiwan and China sign a "mutual nonaggression treaty" for a fixed period of, say, 30 years, he is proposing Taiwan begin treading the path that China and the US State Department have been increasingly desperate to lay down for it. By signing such an agreement -- dare we call it an "interim agreement" as suggested by Stanley Roth and Kenneth Lieberthal, Clinton's point-men on China policy -- Taiwan would be creating the impression that the clock has been set ticking on reunification. This would be disastrous from a strategic point of view for any cross-strait negotiator, and no one with Taiwan's interests at heart would have thought to suggest it.
It goes without saying that Lien's suggestion is not enough; he must be held to his ideas. The foreign affairs and cross-strait policy establishment must quickly be mobilized behind this new message. But Soong's statement warrants far more serious attention. He cannot be allowed to hoodwink the public into believing that appeasement is a policy worth pursuing where the nation's nemesis is concerned.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with