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.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS