As a Singaporean, I found it fitting that new Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (
Our Taiwanese friends should not regard Lee's comments in a negative way. After all, at no time did Lee express any regrets over his four-day visit to Taipei last month. He merely regretted that such a visit caused some hiccups in Singapore-China relations. Also it should be noted that Lee never apologized to China for visiting Taiwan.
It is evident that Lee felt his visit to Taiwan was necessary. I believe many Singaporeans, including myself, supported the prime minister's visit. It would have been absurd for Lee to cancel the visit just because Beijing opposed it. Singapore is not a state of China and if it was to succumb to China's unreasonable demands, it would have cast a doubt over the sovereignty of the nation. Singapore is a small city-state but our integrity and sovereignty will never be compromised as a result of threats from a major power.
Having followed the cross-straits issue since 1999, I share the sentiments of Presidential Office General Su Tseng-chang (
On Lee's remarks that "Singapore would not support Taiwan if the it provoked a cross-strait conflict," I wonder what, then, the position of my country's leadership would be if a conflict is provoked by China? I believe Lee is merely urging Taiwan's government to be responsible in maintaining a cool and passive stance.
Lee probably meant well when he indicated that the Taiwanese media generally has a localized approach. Based on experience of Taiwan, I would say that I share that observation. The perception from the international community is that the Taiwanese people are more interested in which celebrity is dating which, rather than the latest news from Iraq. This is where the media plays a crucial role. Credit should be awarded to some media organizations which not only cover local and entertainment news. One example of this is the Taipei Times, which I read online daily. I hope the Taiwanese people would adopt a more globalized outlook and be wary of international events. Su's graciousness ad humility (and probably that of Chen's administration) is exemplified by his willingness to study Lee's overall observations about Taiwanese society and its politics and then seek to amend the mistakes if what Lee said is true.
In a way, I feel that the ball is in now China's court. They should adopt a more proactive approach to improving cross-straits relations. A strategy of `give and take' is inevitable if both sides are to benefit. While I am not optimistic of such an approach by Beijing in the near future, I am optimistic that relations between Singapore and Taiwan will be maintained at their warm, cordial level.
I sense that continuous levels of cultural, economic, political and educational exchanges between the two countries would benefit both Singapore and Taiwan.
Jason Lee Boon Hong
Singapore
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