Taiwan's geographical position was instrumental in putting it on the world stage during the great ocean-going age of the 16th century. It was because of this that the island became home to many different ethnic groups, and this ethnic diversity naturally led to the multicultural society we now have in Taiwan.
Ethnic and cultural diversity can easily cause ethnic and cultural conflict. If such differences are dealt with skillfully on a political level, however, this very diversity can be turned into a valuable asset for Taiwan.
In other words, if one does everything to avoid discord, remains broad-minded and designs a model in which all groups can be governed together, then this ethnic diversity will guarantee a wealth of talent. If one avoids discrimination and elitism and promotes a multicultural system, cultural diversity will ensure a blossoming culture. This is the first fundamental principle in planning for the future of Taiwan.
Complex historical factors have forced minority rule, colonialism and dictatorship on Taiwan throughout the past 400 years. This ended in 1996 when the Taiwanese people elected their president, ushering in a new era. This did not mean that Tai-wan was free of its pre-1996 historical baggage, and even now it is yet to break free of a triangle including the US and China.
The political reverberations left over from the end of World War II and the civil war fought between the Nationalists and Communists in China are still being felt today. The fallout has made Taiwan captive to the US and a renegade province that China stakes its claim to liberate.
Although Taiwan now meets all the criteria of a nation, it has yet to secure international recognition of its legitimate and full nationhood.
The US is a powerful nation quite capable of protecting its interests in Taiwan. That is not to say, however, that Taiwan has nothing bargain with. China is calling for unification, and if the Taiwanese want China to understand and respect their desire for autonomy, then they will also have to understand and respect why China has no alternative but to call for unification. Only then can the two sides move together in the same direction. It is far wiser to be positive than negative, and this would be a very important principle to follow.
American interests are not absolutely identical to those of China, and it would not be too difficult for Taiwan to secure benefit from both sides. What's more, globalization of the economy is inevitable, and this will significantly change international relations; even the concepts of national boundaries and arms need to be redefined. If we can deal with these changes well, we can reverse our current isolation. This is the second fundamental principle for planning for the future.
Taiwan's importance has always been the economic value of its productive output; this economic value has consistently assured its survival. Taiwan consequently needs to produce new ways of making money.
Taiwan has relied on different products at different times. In the past it has produced deer skins, camphor, tea, sugar, rice, clothes, jewelry, plastics and electronics. In the short term we can expect this role to be taken by bio-tech, but in the longer term the nation is likely to rely on its cultural and tourist industries. Why has no one in government sought to consolidate the various European, Chi-nese, Japanese, American and Aboriginal cultural resources that we have here? Could it be that no one up there has realized that the Pacific coast along Taitung is the nearest stretch of tropical coastline for the several hundred million tourists north of the Pashi Channel?
If these tourists were enticed to spend a few days each visiting Taiwan, and to spend NT$30,000 on Taiwan's cultural and tourism resources, this would become Taiwan's largest and most sustained source of economic interest. This idea needs to be seized and put into practice. Creating the conditions for cultural and tourist facilities of an international standard is the third fundamental principle.
The most important principle, however, needs to be recognized by the government, the opposition and the people. The present-day state of Taiwanese politics was not achieved through bloody revolution, but through a peaceful and gradual process. There is a huge difference between these two paths.
If there had been a revolution, the old system would have been overthrown and replaced by a new one overnight, and the differences between respective systems would have been stark. The non-violent route evades the tragic cost, but demands a kind of "payment in installments" from politicians and the people to offset the price of revolution. This installment plan entails its own kind of anguish, and changes in power and authority need to be borne with patience, tact, compromise and mutual consideration. This is the fourth fundamental principle in planning for the future.
Frank Wu is the chairman of the Public Television Service Foundation.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
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