It has proven difficult for the people of this country to reach a consensus on the advantages and disadvantages of activity across the Taiwan Strait. In a pluralist society, any absolute approval or disapproval will find itself open to criticism.
But Beijing is undoubtedly in a position to lead cross-strait economic activity today. It can, and does, encourage Taiwanese companies and business leaders to relocate to China not only in the interest of economic development but also strategy.
It is for this reason that this country must take national security -- rather than simply the interests of local companies -- into account in cross-strait activity.
China has gradually become more practical and flexible in its handling of Taiwan affairs for the sake of greater political stability and economic prosperity. Taipei should take this shift seriously and come up with measures to counter the vulnerability that result from this flexibility.
Taipei's cautiousness suggests that it has surely realized that Beijing's policy of enticing Taiwanese over to China is already a critical threat to the nation's survival and development. Perhaps the government can now highlight the China threat in a comprehensive and thorough manner, and make clear its own bottom line, so that the public is made fully aware of the risks cross-strait activity involves. This will definitely help this nation reach a strong consensus.
Consider the charter flights to Shanghai during the Lunar New Year holiday. The two sides of the Strait reached an accommodation in which they were no longer entirely opposed to the idea of such flights.
Rather than focus on specific dangers of this linkage, Taiwan itself split into two camps, allowing China to play both ends against the middle.
In response, the government should have made the whole picture clear to the public. Obviously, in the case of the charter flights, the government was under pressure not only from China but also from people who wanted a cheaper and faster family reunion for the holiday and those pushing for direct links.
Beijing has gradually increased its promotion of unification while Taipei has loosened regulations when it comes to certain parts of cross-strait exchange, namely direct links.
Thus, Beijing has constantly pushed ahead while Taipei has given in. In this light, the temporary advantages and disadvantages of the situation become quite apparent.
Beijing will continue to keep the ball in its court, defeating Taipei one point at a time, keeping the pressure on.
The problem is, where exactly is the limit of this pressure? What is the government's bottom line? When will China cross this bottom line, causing a rupture that leads to "game over" for Taiwan?
Will the steady pressure get out of control, causing the nation to abandon itself, or even the international community to abandon its promise to maintain peace and security across the Strait?
The nation's leaders must face this pressure and draw out the whole picture for all to see -- the public, the international community and the Chinese oligarchy and the people over whom they tyrannically rule.
I believe that there is no reason for a frank, sincere government to be blindsided or oppressed, if it's willing to communicate in a rational, humble and practical way.
Yan Jiann-fa is an associate professor in the department of business administration at Ching Yun Institute of Technology.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations