The decision of President Chen Shui-bian (
These are improving the relationship between the Presidential Office and the Legislative Yuan, helping to repair the relationship between his government and some sections of the KMT, and elevating the level of his proxy to the APEC meeting.
However, true to form, Beijing has opposed the idea.
It isn't hard to figure out Beijing's reasons for saying "no." Making Taiwan look bad and constricting Taiwan's breathing space in the international community are pretty safe options when it comes to second-guessing Beijing's motives.
Under the circumstances, the reaction of the pan-blue camp and its leaders are much more noteworthy. Naturally, the pan-blue camp jumped for joy upon hearing the announcement. Even KMT Chairman and Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said he would be "happy" to see it happen.
The real interesting twist came when Beijing rejected the idea. Instead of condemning Beijing for rejecting what he had once considered a great idea, Ma went on to blame the Presidential Office for insisting on the appointment while knowing full well that the Chinese government would say "no."
There are some obvious problems in the logic underlying Ma's position. First, since when has it been a rule that Taiwan must seek the approval of Beijing when appointing delegates to APEC's informal summit meeting? Even if the host country has typically deferred to the relentless and unreasonable demands of Beijing, it is an entirely different matter if people in Taiwan began to see the blessing of Beijing as the top priority when deciding who to send.
Then there is the talk by pan-blue camp members about helping to resolve the problem through its "channels of communication" with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as if they genuinely believe that they have a shot at changing the CCP's position. On second thought, perhaps they already know that they have no chance, so they are saying that their communication with the CCP would have been easier had it taken place before Beijing said no.
But, didn't Chen tell Wang weeks earlier? Why didn't they begin the talks then?
Ever since former KMT chairman Lien Chan (
The only reason that the Chinese leadership was willing to extend the pan-blue leaders a half-decent reception was because this added great value to the Chinese unification propaganda campaign by endorsing the "Greater China" ideology. There is nothing more to the relationship. It is about time everyone saw the truth for what it is.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng (何立峰) are expected to meet this month in Paris to prepare for a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). According to media reports, the two sides would discuss issues such as the potential purchase of Boeing aircraft by China, increasing imports of US soybeans and the latest impacts of Trump’s reciprocal tariffs. However, recent US military action against Iran has added uncertainty to the Trump-Xi summit. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called the joint US-Israeli airstrikes and the
RSS