Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
China's unification propaganda targeting Taiwan has been consistent in its stance, but flexible in its strategy. It has always had the self-interest of the regime at heart. It is so flexible that even Ma, a pro-unification politician who has been dubbed the "future leader of the Taiwan Special Administrative Region" by some Taiwan independence activists, still could not escape being rejected by China. Anyone who oversteps the red line drawn by China will definitely be relentlessly attacked or admonished, making it clear to Taiwan's political figures that they do not have the right to comment freely on Beijing policy.
The Hong Kong government's visa refusal is more likely the result of complying with pressure from Beijing, rather than being an action taken on its own initiative. Yet this incident has created yet another political chasm between Taiwan and Hong Kong. Although Tung Chee-hwa (
In Feb. 2001, the Hong Kong government gave Ma a high-profile reception, and memories of his success with the people of Hong Kong are still fresh. So why has Hong Kong's government decided to brave everyone's displeasure? The reason is pressure from China. If relations between Taiwan and Hong Kong cannot be based on the territory's autonomy, and if Hong Kong cannot even issue a visa without Beijing's approval, then the value of Hong Kong as a model of "one country, two systems" will cease. Taiwan and Hong Kong play the role of "cross-referenced indices" in China's policy. China continues to ignore the democratic aspirations of Hong Kong's people and also continues to put pressure on Taiwan, which has caused the territory to lose all faith in Beijing's promises.
At this time in cross-strait relations, all actions acquire added significance. A visit by Ma to Hong Kong has no political significance, and is not a challenge to China's "one country, two systems" policy, nor does it hinder Hong Kong's continued prosperity. In fact, it can only benefit exchanges between Hong Kong and Taiwan, and assist in improving cross-strait relations.
If China insists on using subjective criteria to view others' actions without taking into account the democratic currents in Taiwan and Hong Kong, any promise made by China will be treated with suspicion by all.
Now that Hong Kong has rejected Ma's application to visit, the people of Hong Kong are angry, the pan blue camp is disappointed, and the people of Taiwan are in despair. The reasons why China has rejected Ma are groundless; it only rejects Taiwan's people.
The negotiations about Lunar New Year charter flights give China another chance to work toward mutually beneficial cross-strait relations.
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