The Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced on Sept. 2 that Taiwan and Mongolia would exchange representative offices. The ministry claimed the deal "can strengthen bilateral cooperation in areas such as economics, trade, culture, tourism and labor affairs." From my experience at the Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs Commission, I am not optimistic. The decision is merely a step toward the "de-sinicization" of Taiwan in a bid to implement the DPP's "Resolution on Taiwan's Future." Is it worthwhile to roll out another diplomatic pork barrel for this tiny benefit?
First, only a few hundred people travel between Taiwan and Mongolia annually. The annual Taiwan-Mongolia trade volume is no more than US$3 million. One must pass through China to enter Mongolia. There is little in the way of Mongolia-bound Taiwanese investments and these mostly focus on clothing because there are no quotas for Mongolian exports to Europe and the US. But as Taiwan and China have joined the WTO and as textile quotas will be removed by 2005, China will replace Mongolia in the textiles market.
Council of Labor Affairs Chair-woman Chen Chu (陳菊) recently visited Mongolia to discuss labor issues. Apparently the government uses the importation of workers as a bargaining chip to expand Taiwan's external relations. But Mongolians face language and cultural barriers in Taiwan and traveling expenses are much higher than that between Taiwan and Southeast Asia. Just how many Mongolian workers could pay the brokerage fees to come to Taiwan is questionable.
Second, Article 4 of the Constitution stipulates that "The territory of the Republic of China according to its existing national boundaries shall not be altered except by resolution of the National Assembly." But the ministry's decision undoubtedly treats Mongolia as an independent state. This is unconstitutional.
To strengthen bilateral ex-changes, the government could have the Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs Commission establish an office in Mongolia. The political intent of its decision reflects the ruling party's "Resolution on Tai-wan's Future," which recognizes that the ROC's sovereign territory only covers "Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu and its affiliated islands."
The China External Trade Development Council set up a Taiwan trade and economic center in Mongolia in June. After only three months, another representative office is to be established. Is it really necessary? The Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs Commission's latest bud-get report contains a plan to set up an office in Mongolia with the help of non-governmental organizations. If this is also to be implemented, there will soon be three offices representing Taiwan in Mongolia. Is this a waste? How will they divide the work?
What advantages can we have by playing this card? Will Mongolia admit the ROC as a result or support Taiwan's bid to rejoin the UN? Will high-ranking Mongolian officials, who care very much about China's attitude, pay frequent visits to Taiwan? I'm afraid that the answer is "no" to all three questions.
The Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs Commission has provided assistance to Mongolia over the years, including food, disaster relief and coordinating with private organizations to provide medical care and humanitarian aid. But the Mongolian government has never publicly accepted such donations. Why should we stoop to such unequal relations? Will it become another diplomatic pork barrel when the ministry, rather than the commission, makes contact with Mongolia? The ruling and opposition parties should raise the issue.
Kao Koong-lian is a professor at Chung-yuan Christian University and a former chairman of the Mongolian and Tibetan Affairs Commission.
Translated by Jackie Lin
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
RSS