With Taiwan having another presidential election next year, cross-strait relations is unlikely to make any progress until then. The reason for this is, of course, that the Chinese communist regime isn't about to give the ruling DPP a helping hand in getting re-elected, thereby giving the political camp that advocates "one country on each side [of the Taiwan Strait]" an opportunity to solidify Taiwanese nationalism.
However, Beijing must handle cross-strait relations with even more pragmatism. Otherwise, the cross-strait relationship will remain tense. Because of the difficulties the KMT and PFP are having in cooperating for the presidential election, the DPP may very well get re-elected next year. Therefore, the Beijing government should seek to understand the sentiments and perceptions of the Taiwanese with even more rationality and sincerity. Then its Taiwan policy won't be misguided by a small number of over-the-hill Taiwanese politicians, causing China's leaders to keep making absurd comments that are comical to the ears of Taiwanese.
Honestly speaking, Beijing's hope of winning support for cross-strait unification through inciting Chinese nationalism in Taiwan is doomed. This is because the Chinese communists' past mistakes and crimes have undermined Beijing's legal legitimacy and its right to rule the Chinese people. Irrespective of how good it may be at paying lip service to cross-strait issues, a regime that should not even rule China cannot inspire any sense of nationalism from the Taiwanese. Besides, no one wants to live under a regime that attaches no value to human lives and dignity. Having gone through the harsh lessons of the 228 Incident and White Terror, Taiwanese know only too well about such pains.
Some members of Taiwan's media have long regarded the political orientation of the Taiwanese as roughly divided into three groups. The first group includes advocates of independence, such as those of the Taiwan Independence Party. Under no circumstances will they ever accept an alien regime. The second group includes advocates of independence who oppose communism. So long as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is in power, they will oppose cross-strait unification until the end. The third group includes those who advocate cross-strait unification. In Taiwan, without any question, there are a lot more people in the first two groups than those in the third group. This is supported by the fact that the pro-independent DPP has been voted into power both in a majority of the county and city governments and the central government.
So, the truth is quite apparent. The main momentum behind the Taiwanese decision to become independent is actually the CCP. The CCP should face up to the reality that most Taiwanese will never ever accept it. They have no one to blame for this but themselves, for they have brought it onto themselves. So Beijing must no longer misjudge the situation, erroneously believing that only a small number of people in Taiwan oppose unification with China. The development of cross-strait relations can become productive only when it is built on an accurate understanding of reality.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US