President Chen Shui-bian's (
The so-called "negative" reactions stem not from the decision itself, but from the international community's concern that China may react in an "unreasonable manner" and endanger world peace. Such concern has been most evident in the US, Europe and other Western nations.
The reports by the quasi- official Voice of America (VOA), which misquoted Taiwanese officials on the issue, added to the misunderstanding and further complicated the problem. This highlights the need for better negotiations between Taiwan and Western nations to sort out contradictions based on their common, strategic benefits.
Even though the negotiations cannot be held based on the principle of equality given Taiwan's unique position in the international community, they should be carried out based on the principle of mutual respect.
But what clearly needs to be sorted out here is that Taiwan is not what China calls a "troublemaker;" instead, it is the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) that is causing the trouble.
Let us put aside China's incessant opposition to any political or economic ideas expressed by democratic nations and restrict ourselves to looking at cross-strait relations. Taiwan's abolition of the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of Communist Rebellion in 1990 in practice marked the end of cross-strait hostilities.
Nevertheless, China continues to resort to military threats to achieve its goal of unification. Shouldn't the Taiwanese take action to oppose China's behavior? What Taiwan is doing is simply using peaceful means to preserve its sovereignty. If Taiwanese are denied this right, then what does the UN Declaration of Human Rights stand for?
Apart from the West, some countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America have not been particularly "friendly" to Taiwan owing to pressure from China. Russia has been the most vocal in opposing Taiwan. Its foreign ministry recently issued a statement saying that "the decision made by Taiwanese leaders [to terminate the council] is not conducive to regional peace and stability."
What is interesting is that it is Russia's arms sales to China that have prompted the Beijing government to expand the scale of its military drills in recent years. What's more, both Russia and China launched a joint military exercise last year in response to the joint US-Taiwan and US-Japan military drills. It takes a lot of effrontery on Russia's part to now accuse Taiwan of jeopardizing peace in the region.
The negative response notwithstanding, Taiwan has made itself heard in the international community because of this controversy. Quite a number of international media outlets such as the New York Times have had extensive coverage of the incident. Although US-Taiwan relations appeared tense for a period, there are also indications that the issue relating to Taiwan's sovereignty can no longer be ignored and suppressed. It is also necessary for both the US and China to review their Taiwan policies, which have been so disrespectful of Taiwanese public opinion in the past.
In China, some Web surfers have even asked why -- if the council and its guidelines were so important -- no one had mentioned them before. Clearly, more and more Chinese are able to see through how Beijing manipulates the issue relating to independence and unification.
Paul Lin is a New York-based political commentator.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti and Daniel Cheng
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