This is not a letter from an irate Taiwanese. This is from an incredulous Malaysian on the
logic of Singaporean Foreign Minister George Yeo's (楊榮文) speech at the UN General Assembly. His criticism of Taiwan is unwarranted in light of Singapore's history and the even-handed treatment it received when it broke away from the Malaysian Federation in 1965. Mind you, Singapore willingly joined the federation in the first place because it perceived there to be advantages in being part of a larger nation.
The point is this: When
Singapore joined the federation in 1963, its government effectively reduced itself to a provincial government. I would think that once a state enters into a political union it gives up certain rights, such as the right to secede.
Throughout history, the exercising of this right has been labeled as anything from "rebellion" to "separatism." I can only think of the breakup of Singapore and Malaysia and the former Czechoslovakia as examples of peaceful separation.
In both cases, the parties involved acted like adults. They sat down, talked and arrived at a mutually agreed solution. I believe that had the federal government of the day chosen to do so, it could have forced the union upon Singapore.
This is in stark contrast to the situation in the Taiwan Strait. Here we have one country laying claim to another country. The People's Republic of China (PRC) has never controlled Taiwan in any way or form. The Republic of China on the other hand lost the mainland to the communists, but kept insisting it was the only legitimate ruler of China. This thickheadedness has left Taiwan with a historical burden, and the average Taiwanese knows this.
As the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) grip on power slowly eroded, the natives rightly wished to put things right by doing away with the ROC and navigating their own destiny. What is wrong with that? George Yeo's derision of Taiwanese independence is therefore most unwarranted, shameless and intellectually bankrupt.
Singapore was able to secede from a union it had clamored to join. Taiwan on the other hand is simply maintaining a sovereignty that is not recognized by Singapore or most of the rest of the world.
Mr. Yeo, please don't let your reverence for Greater China blind you to reality. The same goes for you too, [Prime Minister] Lee Hsien Loong (
The modern ROC is no longer synonymous with the KMT, and it is no longer suppressed by KMT nationalist doctrine. It therefore no longer necessarily believes in reunification. More and more people are beginning to realize the existence of their own culture and consciousness.
This nation has developed separately from China. In fact, China owes much of its present prosperity to Taiwanese businessmen, who are investing heavily there. The Taiwanese, on the other hand, have not received a single word of thanks, only the constant threat of invasion or annihilation. China would have all others believe that those businessmen are patriots returning to the motherland.
Instead of swallowing Chinese propaganda and believing that cross-strait tensions are an internal problem, UN members should take the step of providing Taiwan with some political protection against Chinese aggression.
Taiwan is part of the global village, like it or not. Help it break out of its isolation, not trample on its evolution. It is belligerent China that is missing the opportunity to resolve the dispute peacefully.
Y.J. Ho
Tainan
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with