I have often thought to myself over the last few years that President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was a great civil rights leader, but not much of a president. His administration has often seemed incompetent, duplicitous and simply adrift. At times, it has even been embarrassing and cringe-inducing . The punishment that Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidates have been suffering in opinion polls would seem to bear me out to some degree.
Having witnessed the events surrounding the push for a referendum on a UN bid under the name "Taiwan," however, I think this judgement is now in need of serious modification. What US diplomats have described as crass electioneering on the part of the DPP may, in fact, be just that. Or, it may be the DPP coming to terms with its only reason for being.
The DPP is a civil-rights party that has failed to define itself on any other issue except the monumental one regarding the right of the people of this island to determine their collective fate, a right that may or may not be recognized by the UN, the US, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), China, international law, or academic theory, but which is decreed by something higher -- nature's God perhaps.
When Chen and the DPP are forced (by any of the aforementioned) on to any ground other than the fundamental question of the right to self-determination, they are out of their element and slip into confusion and even corruption, it would seem.
Therefore, what we are witnessing may in fact be an election forcing the normalization of Taiwanese politics (considering the circumstances), not a sudden break from what the US regards as the "status quo" (which seems to be a Taiwan that is devoted to manufacturing gizmos and protecting US intellectual property rights).
What is the "status quo" in East Asia anyway? New democracies in Taiwan and South Korea, a Japan slowly normalizing in terms of foreign relations and defense, a North Korean basketcase fiddling with nuclear bombs and kidnapping foreign nationals, and a China that is growing economically and militarily in a rapid, unpredictable, and opaque fashion.
The "status quo" is what anybody makes of it at any given time. It is hardly the basis for a foreign policy of a superpower with vital interests in the region.
US reservations about what is happening here are certainly understandable, as is its need for Chinese help in protecting Japan and South Korea from the regime in Pyongyang, but the US will find that it has been outmaneuvered by the "status quo" if it cannot come up with a more creative foreign policy than one that simply appeases Beijing.
Taiwanese political and economic development will be stunted and erratic so long as such fundamental questions regarding the sovereignty are kept "undecided" by the powers that have set themselves in judgement over Taiwan.
J. Tavis Overstreet
Chiayi
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
RSS