It has been more than a month since the "small three links" were launched. China's ambiguous attitude has made many wish to jump on the band wagon sigh in disappointment while gazing at the sea. In particular, for the lunar new year, people from Kinmen who live in China still had to travel via Hong Kong or Macau to Taipei and then wait for vacancies on flights from Taipei to Kinmen.
But it appears that "the links" have not been really open. All attempts to decriminalize smuggling -- the minimum goal set by Taipei -- seem to have become futile as well. In fact, small-scale illegal trade is becoming even more rampant than before. Most fishermen from Xiamen will not be able to take part in the model of trade formulated by Taipei, even if Beijing does not object to it. The fishermen can only continue to peddle their goods as street vendors on Kinmen streets.
Because of the continuing gap between the two sides in terms of incomes and the prices of goods, and the reconciliatory atmosphere built up by the small three links, more and more peddlars are coming from China. The rush is quickly turning what used to be a seller's market into a buyer's market. The business order in Kinmen is becoming more and more chaotic, with disputes of varying sizes breaking out from time to time. Some Chinese peddlars shout at and try to provoke coast guard personnel, while others get into brawls in the fight for business, sometimes even killing their rivals.
Such episodes are a glaring contrast to the opening of the small three links. The 190-plus Kinmen residents who joined the first direct sailing to Xiamen have kept praising the city, which had been separated from Kinmen for 52 years. They said Kinmen is at least 40 years behind Xiamen when it comes to development.
But a larger number of Kinmen residents who did not join the direct sailing are witnessing -- at a much closer range along the beaches near their homes -- the dire conditions and brutality of the Chinese. So many people are taking many risks in order to sail boats to Kinmen for the sake of measly profits and a livelihood.
Apart from sympathy for those struggling to make a living, Kinmen residents are also beginning to have doubts and fears -- especially those over 60 or 70. They have opposed the small three links from the outset, due to their past experience of violence and looting coming from the other shore. Today, despite the extensive exchanges, the pernicious deeds of some Chinese along the coastline are bringing anxiety.
With Taiwan's economy remaining sluggish -- and with no other good prospects in sight for Kinmen -- most of the residents take the small three links as a panacea for the islands, even though they do not quite trust China and the links may have an impact on public security. Those obsessed with the notion of a "Greater China" have pinned their hopes for the future on China. The small three links, which have been late in coming, have eventually enabled them to properly embrace the idea of a Greater China.
No matter how Kinmen residents regard the opening of the small three links, their launch has certainly changed Kinmen's role and value in cross-strait relations. The "Kinmen frontline" has been quietly replaced by the "Penghu frontline" as Kinmen's symbolic value as a potential battleground dies away.
It is high time we readjusted the relations between Taiwan proper and Kinmen, and those between Kinmen and Xiamen as well. The discussions that surfaced in the media during the wave of small three links hype, such as "Kinmen to be kept by Xiamen," "Kinmen and Matsu to be `mainlandized,'" "Kinmen and Xiamen to jointly build a co-prosperity sphere," all assume that Kinmen will finally move to the other side of the strait. These comments, from Kinmen's government officials, local people and cross-strait observers, represent today's mainstream opinion to a considerable extent -- Kinmen will first be "linked up" with China and then"integrated" into it.
Amid the complexity of cross-strait relations, Kinmen does not appear to enjoy much self-determination about what its next step should be. China has its own calculations, after all, and Kinmen remains a member of the Taiwan-Penghu-Kinmen-Matsu community. Kinmen has been thoroughly Taiwanized.
But things unique to Kinmen still remain -- a location too close to China, more than 40 years of military restrictions that have had a deep impact on the thinking and political identity of Kinmen residents for two generations. Their painful experience of coming under artillery fire quite a few times has made Kinmen residents extremely sensitive about war and peace -- as can be glimpsed from the voters' tendencies in past elections, and from the responses to the small three links.
Seeing Kinmen gradually pushed towards (or sucked into) China may satisfy some Kinmen residents. But, if Kinmen really develops in this direction, it will be necessary to modify the "Taiwanized" thinking of Kinmen residents.
Besides, the umbilical cord connecting Kinmen and Taiwan proper is bound to wither. Kinmen's income levels, which are currently much higher than the mainland's, will shrink. Kinmen will then lose its special value across the strait. It must return to "fundamentals" and start from scratch.
After the small three links come the "big three links," and Kinmen is like a ship drifting in the sea. The residents can only pray for warmer cross-strait relations so that they may live in safety and without panic.
The important task facing us now is how properly to serve as a herald of harmony between the two sides -- instead of blindly hurrying to embrace the mainland and painting fantastic rainbows.
Chou Cheng-lai is a senior high school teacher in Kinmen.
Translated by Gatian Wang and Francis Huang
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers