The question of Taiwan's responsibility for last week's rioting in the Solomon Islands is an important one and worthy of investigation. It would be prudent for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) to grill its ambassador in Honiara, Antonio Chen (
If hearsay in the international press is to be believed, however, MOFA itself is the cause of the conflict. Loads of cash, so the theory goes, was sent to Snyder Rini to ensure his election as prime minister, meaning his rivals could not switch Honiara's allegiance to Beijing. The theory, however, is based in the perceptions of a destructive mob that couldn't tell the difference between Chinese, Taiwanese and Solomon Islanders of Chinese descent.
It's one thing for the press to speculate on the causes of the unrest; it's another for governments to level accusations at Taipei without providing any evidence, which is exactly what Australian Prime Minister John Howard, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, Justice Minister Chris Ellison and New Zealand Defense Minister Phil Goff have done.
Admittedly, criticism from New Zealand -- which is more grounded in Austronesian culture than Australia, and whose government has ministers prepared to publicly support Taiwan -- has resonance. And "dollar diplomacy" is a distasteful and corrosive problem. Yet it will be hard to stamp out as long as China blocks Taiwan from entering into diplomatic relations with who it chooses. That is the reality.
But criticism from Australia is laughable. Howard and Downer, dealers in "evidence" of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, ought to furnish proof of Taipei's mischief, or else their accusations can be assumed to have motives other than improving fraternity with Melanesia. Canberra's scapegoating has obscured its own astounding inability to predict and -- through Australian-led peacekeepers -- contain unrest stemming from widespread dissatisfaction with the winning candidate.
On Wednesday, in the presence of Chinese Ambassador to Australia Fu Ying (
If Fu took the slightest notice of Downer, it wasn't apparent the next day, when Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang (
Before Canberra scolds Taipei for its South Pacific maneuvering, it would do well to reflect on its own conduct in relation to Papua New Guinea (endless aid to what effect?), East Timor (where Downer's lust for oil trumped civility toward a battered new nation) and most notoriously Nauru, where a hopeless government was bought off with at least 20 million Aussie-minted "diplomacy dollars" to detain bona fide asylum seekers.
For strategic and moral reasons, MOFA must ground its relations with other countries in things more enduring and conspicuous than gifts of cash. But "dollar diplomacy," even if implicated in this instance, is marginal in explaining the Solomon Islands' predicament.
Australia knows this, but does not say so. Its behavior again displays contempt for Taiwan, denial of its own weaknesses in the region and the dismissal of the benefits that Taipei delivers to its allies.
So why has Minister of Foreign Affairs James Huang (
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past