Why delay on air links?
As the government has done since it assumed power, it is trying to buy time on a pressing issue without taking firm steps so that a conclusion can be reached. This has been shown in the past month in its handling of the issue of direct air links between Taiwan and China.
There is a feeling in aviation circles, and rightly so, that the link could be negotiated on a private basis, and that government talks are not needed. The precedent is there in the form of the Hong Kong-Taiwan aviation talks. Beijing has indicated a willingness to have the issue addressed at a private level.
In pushing for government-to-government talks on the issue, the government is making the reality of direct links impossible.
I find this stance counter-productive as it is mired in politics. For China to allow talks on the government's terms, they are conceding the sovereignty of Taiwan -- something they are not willing to do. Clearly this issue is important to the people of Taiwan and needs to be addressed, but an aviation agreement is not the forum. Direct air links are indeed a step in the direction of eventual full dialogue. I find the DPP obtuse in this regard.
The DPP is trying to gain political leverage on Beijing by not dealing with this issue as it should be dealt with. The US is now adding its two cents by hoping that foreign airlines will be allowed to fly passengers between China and Taiwan when the route opens up. In actually considering this idea, the government once again is showing bad faith.
It is unlikely that Beijing will agree to foreign airlines flying the route as it creates the idea that it is an international route. Beijing has already compromised by saying they will not regard the route as domestic, but cross-strait.
The government also needs to think about its airlines. Taiwan-China routes will be very lucrative, if the Taipei-Hong Kong route is any indication, and this will be an opportunity for the nation's airlines to grow. It is true that Washington will offer new routes in the US in return, but the financial gain will not be significant.
I am not naive in suggesting that one can ever remove politics when discussing Taiwan and China, but we need to listen to the businessmen and their families who want links re-instated. Let us allow talks on the issue to proceed at a non-governmental level in the way that Hong Kong-Taiwan aviation talks were conducted.
It would be interesting to see what the people of Taiwan would say were a referendum held on the issue. After all, what is more important than the collective will or voice of the people?
Brandon Stoltenkamp
Kaohsiung
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