Taiwan's model role
The article ("Chen calls on China to restart stalled dialogue," Nov. 11, page 1) could not help make me think that President Chen Shui-bian's (
Your editorial page backed up that assertion saying, "In May, Chen came up with a solution to opening direct links without having direct negotiations between Beijing and Taipei."
But now that China has called Chen's bluff by agreeing in principle to his formula for such relations, he is backpedaling and wrapping himself in the flag -- although it is not clear what flag anymore.
Granted, it is better to backpedal in defense of the country than to maintain a foolish consistency, but now Chen's talk of a desire to normalize relations with the PRC has proven hollow.
From the beginning, in word and deed, Chen has proven that he has no desire to incite a conflict. Taiwan's allies and enemies alike have no reason to doubt his competency.
Insofar as his "middle way" has exhausted its utility, Chen can now take a more aggressive line with China. Aside from China's belligerence toward Taiwanese sovereignty, the biggest issue has arguably been the question of direct links.
There are not many advantages Taiwan has in its confrontation with China. One of the few is the moral highground Taiwan has in the eyes of the world. Taiwan cannot afford to give China more opportunities to appear reasonable and non-ideological.
In being more aggressive with China, Chen does not have to call for referendums or talk about the sovereignty of the ROC (especially since the ROC cannot be said to have any sovereignty, except insofar as it serves as a mechanism through which the people of Taiwan express their sovereign wills).
It only means that he has to be frank and direct. He must be honest with the people of Taiwan and with the rest of the world by stressing at least two facts -- that the question of Taiwan's right to self-determination is not an isolated one, nor is it likely to be resolved quickly or easily and that there can be no free Asia without a free China.
The liberal powers of Asia cannot afford to be passive about China's progress toward pluralist democracy. Nor can they afford to rely almost ex-clusively on US activism to fend off Chinese aggression. Liberal values are only now beginning to bud in Asia. But if they are to survive, they have to guard not only against reactionaries at home, but tyrants abroad, as well.
The people of Taiwan have been thrust into an enormously difficult situation, forced into an undesired confrontation with China, simply be-cause they wish to determine their own destiny. They cannot afford not to talk about the creation of a liberal Asia and, consequently, the eventual liberation of China.
Taiwan's hopes of exercising its right to self-determination cannot be won alone. The support Taiwan now receives from abroad is not in defense of ROC sovereignty; it is in support of Taiwan's emerging democracy and its right to self-determination.
Taiwan must make it clear that the future of Taiwan is the future of Asia. If Taiwan is allowed to fall to the barbarism of the "Great China" ideology, it will be a huge disaster for freedom in Asia.
In short, Taiwan's freedom is bound to the freedom of Asia. Or, rather, Asia's freedom is bound to the freedom of Taiwan.
Taiwan's peculiar situation necessitates that its political leaders actively claim the vanguard of Asian liberalism. It is time for the Taiwanese to forge their own destiny, to make their voices heard in Asia and across the globe.
Nobody else can do it for them.
J. Tavis Overstreet
Chiayi
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