Before the campaign for the nation's presidential election has even been formally launched, the Chinese government warned Taiwan and the US; although it would have been wise to restrain itself from getting involved in Taiwan's elections so as not to repeat its mistakes from 1996 and 2000 when it campaigned against candidates it disliked. Beijing's leaders seem to lack wisdom and tolerance.
Faced with Taiwan's call for referendum legislation and a new constitution, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (
Wen tried to intensify his intimidation by saying "We completely understand the desire of the Taiwan compatriots for democracy and a peaceful environment. However, when the leadership of the Taiwan authorities wants to separate Taiwan from Chinese territory, no Chinese will agree."
So far, Wen is the highest-ranking Chinese official to declare Beijing's formal stance on Taiwan's referendum legislation. It is generally believed that Wen's upcoming trip to the US, scheduled to begin on Dec. 7, is aimed at urging the US to suppress Taiwan's recent move toward independence.
Since China has never implemented democracy on its soil, Wen's understanding of it is poor. Holding referendums and writing a constitution are only two ways for Taiwanese people to exercise their political rights. They are not necessarily equal to Taiwan independence.
Furthermore, Chinese leaders don't understand what Taiwanese people want. It's China that is pushing Taiwan toward independence. In the history of interaction between the two sides, Taiwanese people have few happy memories. The leadership in Beijing must ask itself: Has China ever offered any effective incentives for promoting unification?
China has long attempted to oppress and suffocate Taiwan's diplomatic activities. The regime never ceases its efforts to intimidate Taiwan either through propaganda or military force. During the epidemic of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Beijing did not cooperate with Taiwan and concealed the reality of the SARS situation in China. When Taiwan needed a helping hand from the World Health Organization, China not only obstructed the process but also said "Who cares about you [Taiwanese]?"
Even in the economic arena, China spares no effort to lower Taiwan's status. To Taiwan's proposal to initiate the small three links, China said no. When Taiwan pushed for direct freight links, China refused to talk. Even those hundreds of thousands of China-based Taiwanese businesspeople, who function as a driving force behind China's bright economic performance, are in the eyes of the Chinese government and people are just cash cows to be milked.
Suppose that a man, upon breaking up with his wife, threatens her by saying "If you divorce me, I'm going to kill you." Most likely, the woman would divorce him and run as far away as she could. The same principle applies to cross-strait relations. If China mistakenly thinks that imposing pressure on the relationship can bring about reunion, the result may turn out to be just the opposite.
China does not need to "pay any price" to prevent Taiwan from moving toward independence. All it needs to do is change its attitudes and respect Taiwan's current status as an independent and sovereign entity. Let Taiwan have freedom. Take away the walls and the missiles across the Strait. Let people freely engage across the Strait and discover each other's merits and their common interests. Then there may be a chance to start the relationship anew.
Let bygones be bygones. After the two sides start to treat each other equally, perhaps they will reunite. Even if they don't, they would know each other well enough that the breakup wouldn't seem too bad.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers