Last night, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) returned to Taiwan from China. His visit reveals that the idea of "China" is embedded in his political genes, and it has led to a highly charged response from the Taiwanese public, who either love or detest him for it. They have made their feelings clear through demonstrations of support and protest during his departure and his return.
And when Lien and Chinese President Hu Jintao (
In the past the pan-blue camp only flirted with China. Now, Lien's visit has brought the relationship to a more substantial level. The KMT has direct contact with the CCP and has established a platform for party-to-party relations.
This is bitterly ironic. The Presidential Office is only half a kilometer from KMT headquarters. Yet the KMT and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) have failed to establish a platform for party-to-party relations in the five years of Chen Shui-bian's (
The Lien-Hu memorandum says that the two sides should establish a military confidence-building mechanism. This is little more than hot air, given that the KMT and the DPP have failed to agree on basic military matters. As a result of a pan-blue boycott, the arms-procurement bill has languished in the legislature for years. Before confidence-building mechanisms can be put in place, it is first necessary to establish military stability across the Taiwan Strait. If the military disparity is too wide, putting our cards on the table will only invite China to use force.
The top priority therefore is to monitor the military situation through international inspections. This is the only way to achieve peace. Preaching peace with a hostile nation without building a force sufficient to repel an invasion is empty talk.
During his trip, Lien said that he, his family and his party had historical links with China. We want to remind him that he only spent 10 years in China as a child, and that it was his 60-year career in Taiwan that gave him affluence and influence. The KMT existed in Taiwan is much longer than its history in mainland. In Taiwan, it has a 60-year history. Lien's desire, like his party, to indulge in nostalgia is understandable, but regardless of any connection Lien and his party have with China, his actions should give absolute priority to the Taiwanese people.
Lien's trip has succeeded in cementing a place, however small, in China's history. It has also generated reasonable suspicion that he is preparing to act treacherously against Taiwan. On his return, Lien should present Chen with a report on his trip. He should also instruct the KMT legislative caucus to end its boycott of the arms-procurement budget. This will help repair the damage he has done to his image among Taiwanese people.
Lien must show that domestic stability is on his agenda, otherwise he will have demonstrated that Taiwan's basic interests do not coincide with his own.
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