The fuss stirred up by the talks that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
Hu has managed to take the upper hand in cross-strait issues from the US. Washington, whose role no longer appears quite as dominant as it was, is now vying with Beijing for influence over Taiwan. In addition, the US' ability to define the nature of the status quo in the Taiwan Strait is beginning to slip.
In the past, the US' dominant role was due in part to its superior military, as well as Taiwan's refusal to bow before Chinese intimidation. As a protector of Taiwan's democratic freedoms, US intervention had a degree of legitimacy.
This has all changed with Lien's and Soong's willingness to engage in talks with Hu. With one swift move, Hu can now meddle in Taiwan's political agenda through the KMT and the PFP, and has gained a degree of legitimacy similar to that of the US through doing so, diluting US dominance as a result.
Hu has also been able to create divisions in public opinion within Taiwan itself.
In point of fact, the US should have paid more attention to these talks and not be suckered into thinking they were a precursor for talks between Hu and President Chen Shui-bian (
The US should have insisted that the process be peaceful and cautioned that its results conform to the wishes of the Taiwanese people. If it had done so, Washington would still have been able to call the shots, define the bottom line, and have some control over how the situation develops.
This lack of understanding caused US statements prior to the visits to be interpreted as a blank check for Lien and Soong to say whatever they wanted in China. The US' emphasis was on paving the way for a meeting between Chen and Hu, but after Lien started making public statements in China, Washington belatedly realized that things were out of control.
Washington's calls for a dialogue between Chen and Hu are now too late. These would simply be regarded as yet another meeting between political parties. The ability of the US to have a decisive influence on the current cross-strait situation has therefore been greatly diminished by Hu's political tactics to sow dissent among political parties in Taiwan.
The pan-green camp's victory in the National Assembly elections has not affected the current political atmosphere. In the absence of strong leadership, the spirit of unified defiance with which Taiwan met the threats of China's missiles in 2000 may now be a thing of the past.
In the face of the recent changes in the relationship between the US, China and Taiwan, we must show ourselves able to take the initiative and define the issues. Hu doesn't need to exert influence indirectly through the US anymore, as he is able to act directly through allies in Taiwan, undermining the US' ability to control the agenda in the Taiwan Strait.
With China and the US competing for influence over Taiwan, it is likely that a pro-China and pro-US camp will emerge in response. This scenario has some similarities to the situation in Lebanon, where there exists a pro-Israel Christian force and a pro-Syria Islamic faction. This will be one of the greatest challenges that Taiwan's democracy has ever faced.
Lai I-chung is director of foreign policy studies at the Taiwan Thinktank.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti and Paul Cooper
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under