The Lunar New Year cross-strait chartered flights broke a 56-year-old political deadlock, offering for the first time direct flights that are two-way, mutual and non-stop. This shows that the national security concerns and political obstacles that stood in the way of such flights no longer are insurmountable. The biggest remaining obstacle for direct flights now probably exists only in the minds of the leaders in Taipei and Beijing.
Many people hope that these chartered flights will be the first of many attempts to break the ice, but given political realities this is by no means certain.
The cross-strait political deadlock, including everything from "one China" to the "anti-secession" legislation, will be very difficult to break through. However, Jia Qinglin's (賈慶林) speech on the anniversary of Jiang Zemin's (江澤民) "Eight Points," where he said that acknowledging the "1992 consensus" is one of the conditions that must be met in order to revive cross-strait talks, implies one possible way to break through the decade-long deadlock.
If Premier Frank Hsieh's (謝長廷) talk about the constitutional "one China" framework can be made part of the next Cabinet's policies, there is definite hope for peaceful dialogue.
The natural question following the realization of cross-strait flights is "What's next?" Are the flights a harbinger of direct flights, dialogue, exchanges and reconciliation, or are they just the calm before the storm that will follow the anti-secession legislation and a new constitution for Taiwan in 2008? The coverage on the flights in the international media contains much food for thought for both China's and Taiwan's leaders.
If China wants to effectively follow up on its talk of pinning its hope on the people of Taiwan, there is no way that they will be able to do so by passing anti-secession legislation. Such a law will only serve to alienate the people of Taiwan from Beijing and legitimize the desinicization that already is taking place in Taiwan.
It is said that the weaker must use intelligence when dealing with the stronger, and some of the more radical suggestions in Taiwan for expanding local opposition, such as enacting anti-annexation legislation and holding a referendum, are not in Taiwan's best interests.
Taiwan for its part should consider the following issues.
First, the government should review the charter flights and consider whether national interests have been protected, whether Taiwan's sovereignty and dignity have been respected, whether cross-strait tensions have been reduced and whether its people's interests have been guaranteed.
If these questions are answered in the affirmative, ways should be found to expand such flights and increase cross-strait exchanges in order to bring the people out of the shadow of war.
Second, we should discuss whether a democratic government exists to manage or to serve the public. The small details which show the government's "management" mindset, such as the fact that Taiwanese students were not allowed to travel on the flights and the government's use of the flights as an opportunity to punish those engaged in matters it does not encourage. Looking at the bigger issues, we are given to wonder how many businesspeople have wasted time and money on endless flight transfers every year? Isn't this something to which a government serving the people should try to find a solution?
Third, although the government and opposition here are fighting to claim credit for the charters, the view of the international community is that it is President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) achievement.
Chen should understand that he is responsible for the success or failure of anything that occurrs during his presidency. The question of how to use the opposition as leverage and give the Cabinet the authority it needs to break through the cross-strait deadlock will determine his legacy. He should rise above party politics and power struggles.
As depicted in the Democratic Progressive Party's flag, Taiwan stands at a historical crossroads. Chen will have to decide whether the next three years will be a continuation of the previous five years' calls for the public to protect Taiwan, opposition to China and continued deadlock, or if he will create a historical reconciliation between government and opposition. It's all a matter of making the right decision.
Emile Sheng is an assistant professor in the department of political science at Soochow University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry