"One country, two systems" has become the talk of Taiwan recently. This has been a big surprise for me even though, having been to Taiwan quite a few times, I have more or less gotten used to all the weird things that occur in Taiwanese politics.
According to the results of a recent opinion poll, 47.5 percent of the respondents find one country, two systems acceptable. Putting aside the question of how reliable the poll is (I don't believe it), I would like to ask those friends who support one country, two systems: do you know where Hong Kong has ended up after accepting this model?
Deng Xiaoping (
The so-called one country, two systems did appear impressive at the time of the handover. I had a friend who participated in "Operation Yellow Sparrow" (
Even I felt at the time that my studies of the Chinese Communist Party's history had been inadequate. After all, there are times when the party does tell the truth? Also taken in was the entire Western world, where the media overwhelmingly believed Hong Kong had actualized one country, two systems.
But careful observers were beginning to feel that Beijing was making clandestine maneuvers -- trying to turn "two systems" into one. But Beijing moved slowly and carefully. For example, the pro-Beijing leftists were suppressed and denied any attention, even after the hand-over. After two or three years, when one country, two systems had become a trustworthy phrase, things began to happen quietly.
Dissidents were no longer allowed into Hong Kong. Cheung Man-yee (張敏儀), the head of Radio Television Hong Kong who supported free speech, was trans-ferred to a trade post in Japan. A ruling by the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal was overturned by the standing committee of the National People's Congress in Beijing. The Public Order Ordinance (公安條例) was amended. Agents from Beijing's Ministry of State Security detained people in Hong Kong. As things got in-creasingly serious, the picture of a dagger has gradually emerged. Recently, the Legislative Council passed a bill that allows the central government to sack the Special Administrative Region's chief executive.
One country, two systems has failed to keep things intact for even five years, let alone 50. Today, only a handful of news-papers still take swipes at Beijing. Just watch. Their turn is coming soon.
The people of Taiwan, who have never really cared very much about what happens outside of Taiwan, cannot afford to be ignorant of Beijing's subtle explication: one country over two systems. In fact, one country, two systems reminds me of the title of an American movie: True Lies.
Wang Dan is a Chinese pro-democracy activist.
Translated by Francis Huang
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
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
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath