The delegation led by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Vice Chairman Chiang Pin-kun (江丙坤) chose April Fools Day to bring their 10-point consensus with China back to Taiwan. But Taiwanese don't find the joke particularly funny. Looked at from the perspective of the national good, the visits by high-level KMT members -- the timing, the role they chose to play and the results -- are all inappropriate.
With regard to the timing, the KMT chose to make the visit immediately following the passage of the "Anti-Secession" Law. At a time when local and international opinion was directed against this absurd and barbaric move by China, the KMT's actions served to help China maintain the facade that its intentions are peaceful and that the law is beneficial to cross-strait relations.
Whether intentionally or not, the KMT has helped China out of the disadvantageous position it got itself into by passing the Anti-Secession Law.
The KMT, in making a visit to China and signing an agreement with a foreign power, has shown a serious confusion about who they are. Whether from the perspective of international law or diplomatic protocol, opposition parties rarely, if ever, negotiate an agreement with the government of a foreign country.
An opposition party may assist the government in promoting foreign policy, but that they should be the signatories is very bizarre.
If any political party were entitled to sign an agreement with foreign powers and then return home to demand it be implemented, then what purpose would the government serve?
As for the results, the 10-point consensus brought back by the KMT is a sugar-coated poison pill that places Taiwan in a disadvantageous negotiating position. The 10 points all seem to be of a practical nature and avoid sensitive political issues.
If they were implemented, they may well be beneficial in reducing tensions across the Taiwan Strait. But the problem is what it avoids, for it fails to address the one issue that China most stubbornly insists upon.
In future, when the government of Taiwan seeks negotiations on the above issues, China will once again put forward the "one China" principle and the 1992 consensus as prerequisites for adopting any proposals.
To put it another way, China presents a rosy future to the KMT, but remains unchanged in its dealings with the government.
It's like a salesperson promoting a product to a child by telling them of the special benefits and preferential price they will receive, but when the time comes for the parents to actually pay for the product, the salesperson presents a different persona, pointing out the stringent terms and conditions that must be abided by, and the harsh terms of payment.
Appealing to the opposition by offering benefits so that they will put pressure on the government, and then demanding compliance with stringent conditions when negotiating with the government, is a strategy that China has often used.
From the negotiations that took place between the KMT and the Chinese government we can clearly see that China is trying to sow dissention and exacerbate existing conflicts within Taiwan in an effort to undermine morale and unity.
It seems a great pity that the party that claims to have made the most comprehensive study and to have the best understanding of China cannot even see through this crudest of unificationist ploys.
I don't know if this has anything to do with April Fools day. Is the KMT simply fooling itself, or is it playing the people of Taiwan for fools?
Luo Chih-cheng is executive director of the Institute for National Policy Research.
Translated by Ian Bartholomew
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US