In an attempt to repair the damage after China was offended by the visit to Taipei of Lee Hsien Loong (李顯龍), Singaporean Foreign Minister George Yeo (楊榮文) criticized Taiwan independence in a speech in the UN General Assembly. The speech didn't get much of a response from Taiwanese media and politicians at the time.
Three days later, however, when Minister of Foreign Affairs Mark Chen (陳唐山) returned from the US, he responded to Yeo's criticism during a meeting with an organization from southern Taiwan. His use of a colloquial Taiwanese expression has been played up by some politicians and media outlets, who are now demanding his resignation.
Their reaction has been even fiercer than that of Chen's target, Singapore. This kind of topsy-turvy logic could only occur in Taiwan. But the reaction of these politicians and media was not due to their support or feelings for Singapore. Rather, it is because Singapore has become a spokesperson for China. This is why they so vigorously defend Singapore's anti-Taiwanese statements.
Their aim is to sow discord between Taiwan and Singapore in order to help China isolate Taiwan on the international stage.
Be it "snot" or "balls," such words must of course not enter the language of diplomacy, but it is not a big deal when they are used in a speech aimed at a domestic audience. Sensational reporting by the media, however, has made it seem as if these words were aimed at other countries, which makes it difficult [for Chen] to get off the hook.
But is this really a topic interesting enough to sustain several days of exaggerated media reporting? It is not very different from expressions in Mandarin or Cantonese meaning the same thing.
Although we should condemn Singapore's interference in Taiwan's domestic affairs in strong terms, there is no need to devote too much time and effort doing so, because we must also understand Singapore's position, which in some ways is similar to Taiwan's. First, China wants to annex Taiwan, and Singapore also risks annexation. China has always believed that the descendants of the Yellow Emperor must make up one China, and that there cannot be two Chinas or one China and one Taiwan. That of course also means that there cannot be one China and one Singapore either.
Second, if we are to follow China's "since-the-days-of-old" logic, then we should argue that the minuscule island of Singapore has been part of Malaysian territory "since the days of old." Singapore could only declare independence because of the interference of British colonialism. Doesn't that mean that if China can start a war to "liberate" Taiwan, Malaysia also has the right to start a war to annex Singapore?
It is in order to deal with this threat that Singapore is fawning over China -- it used to exhort Hong Kong not to oppose China, and now it is criticizing Taiwan for opposing China. Singapore shows such a lack of principle that it even allowed China to make whatever changes it wanted to the memoirs of "founding father" Lee Kuan Yew's (李光耀).
In this respect, Taiwan has retained more dignity than Singapore. Only Taipei's former deputy mayor, Pai Hsiou-hsiung (白秀雄), has had his speech manuscript changed by China -- ?during a visit to Shanghai. China has not, however, dared change speeches by former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). As the Chinese saying goes, only if you humiliate yourself will you be humiliated by others.
Although Singapore's leadership is currying favor with China without worrying about sacrificing the interests of Hong Kong and Taiwan, they of course also have a bottom line. For example, even though Singapore upholds "Asian values," the leadership is very clear in advocating that the US should maintain a military presence in Asia, because the US can protect Singapore from being annexed. Taiwan does not act in this way.
A few months ago, a Chinese tourist was humiliatingly treated as a prostitute by Singaporean authorities, seriously damaging the city-state's image. Looking to preserve calm in the overall situation, Taiwan did not exaggerate the incident. Now, however, Singapore requites this kindness with ingratitude to suck up to China.
If Singapore really is following Confucian teachings, it should remember the Confucian saying that "you should not do to others what you don't want done to yourself." Taiwan and Singapore should cooperate to avoid annexation by the regional hegemon.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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