Many Taiwanese people might have been taken aback by local newspaper headlines on New Year's Day, which included: "President Chen Shui-bian (
After reading Chen's New Year address, I was really disappointed! In the 20th century, Taiwan endured hardships when it was colonized by Japan in the first half of the century, and again when it was ruled by the autocratic KMT in the second half of the century. Consequently, many Taiwanese have placed their hopes on the establishment and local political parties, hoping that local Taiwanese can have a chance to "become their own masters" (
On March 18, 2000, the DPP's victory in the presidential election was only the beginning for Taiwan. The DPP government also brought new hope to this island when it was formed on May 20, 2000. However, seven months after the "rotation of political parties" (
Unfortunately, Chen's New Year address clearly declared that Taiwan is heading back to the old path with the DPP government deciding to bow its neck to Beijing's "one China" (
China has always wanted to annex Taiwan using its hegemonic power. No matter how hard Chen tries, his attempts will never be recognized by Beijing. Despite Chen's goodwill, sincerity and humble attitude, Beijing officials still have the skeptical attitude of "listen to what he [Chen] says and observe his moves" (
What upsets me most is that Chen's address showed that the DPP government has made a compromise of capitulation under the pressure of Beijing's threats and the despotic power of the savage and absurd "opposition-alliance" (
In Chinese leaders' eyes, "integration" is a synonym for "splittism" (
As Taiwan moves into the 21st century, its national leader must endure difficulties with dogged will and be determined to hold the steering wheel tightly if Taiwan is to achieve national solidarity. By doing this, we can lead this island to a brighter future with dignity. If we go back to the miserable and dark old path, how are we going to explain this decision to our future generations? I therefore appeal to the government not to let the people of Taiwan down.
Lin Pi-yao is a professor of chemistry at Tunghai University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing