One of the most powerful things about being multilingual is that it allows one to see a far more complex side of people -- and deromanticizes what would otherwise be rendered as exotic. American Institute in Taiwan Director Stephen Young, for example, is multilingual and so has the ability to observe Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
Most people of influence in Washington are not privy to the wealth of Ma's throwaway comments and actions over the years that reflect the subordinate status of democracy in his thinking. But these people are privy to the analysis of foreign correspondents who prefer to wax lyrical, for example, on Ma's beautiful features. Wiser heads in Washington would do well to carefully note this schmooze factor in Ma's politicking, and how it plays a more important role for his presidential aspirations than coherent policy.
Much has been made of Ma's disarming language skills and congenial manner as he travels across Europe and the US, contrasting acutely with Chen's scattershot English and ventriloquist dummy's grin. And for Ma, the timing of his US trip is quite superb. Exploiting US jitters over Iraq by presenting a pragmatic "solution" to ominous problems in the Taiwan Strait could not be a more lucrative strategy.
It can only be hoped that those who expect more from Ma than a warm handshake, a dazzling smile and complete English sentences will continue to probe him on his willingness and ability to stand up to Chinese violence.
The skeptical will also have noted that with Ma, there is only a small gap between being smooth and being slippery. It has proven impossible for anyone to establish why, in Ma's opinion, Beijing would take the slightest notice of a president who fails to keep his military fully armed. This is because Ma has patronized his US audiences with a mix of carefully structured evasiveness and mistruths. There's also been a hefty slice of pie in the sky: The idea that China would consider Ma's proposal of a 30 to 50-year moratorium on unification and then honor any agreement is so naive as to be pitiful.
US officials whose knowledge of Taiwan does not extend beyond the odd meeting with visiting officials and irregular Internet surfing would not know that the KMT's innermost ideology only pays lip service to democratic ideals. This is not to deny that there has been democratization in the KMT, but any sober observer who witnessed events after the last presidential election would know that the KMT remains only a few budding demagogues away from regression to its earlier putrid self. That the DPP is flailing in its attempt to do better does not make this any less true.
Ma appears not to be a demagogue-in-waiting, and the average Taiwanese is unlikely to back such regression. But the mischief that led to former KMT chairman Lien Chan's (
Any person who walks away from a meeting with Ma starry-eyed at the sight of a "Chinese" political leader speaking passable English and promising stability, economic development and a democratic China is abjectly naive -- and Ma would surely agree, given that he has already stated that Americans are gullible. The irony is that it is to these same Americans whom Ma is pitching his wares. Sadly, there is every likelihood that he will find many an eager customer itching for traction in the dying years of the Bush administration.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing