TAIWAN'S RECOGNITION OF Kosovo's independence made headline news in the newly independent state, the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times' sister newspaper) reported. However, China insists that Taiwan is not a sovereign state, and has no right to recognize Kosovo. Loud complaints from Beijing compelled a Kosovo Web site to remove Taiwan from the list of countries that had recognized its independence. As a sovereign state, when will Taiwan's international status and dignity be secured?
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) opposes Taiwanese independence because he promotes eventual unification with China. Faced with rising Taiwanese consciousness, Ma does not dare suggest unification directly. His anti-independence discourse is instead justified through Beijing's threat of military attack as well as opposition from the US and the international community. Taiwanese independence supporters are depicted as troublemakers for the international community. But is international politics really so simple? Is Taiwanese independence really just a form of trouble making?
Zbigniew Brzezinski, former US president Jimmy Carter's national security advisor, said in his latest book, The Second Chance, that the foreign policies of former US presidents George Bush and Bill Clinton and US President George W. Bush change with, rather than influence or lead, international developments. Furthermore, all three were or are frequently guilty of misjudging the situation and in the end rely mostly on chance to resolve issues.
Ukrainian independence is one such example. Bush senior underestimated the intensity of non-Russian nationalism, believing that a strong Soviet identity would prevent non-Russian nationalities within the Soviet Union's borders from seeking independence.
During a visit to the Ukraine in August 1991, he indicated in a speech that the US would not support Ukrainian independence. While the US supported Ukraine in its pursuit of freedom, it did not support using ethnic hatred as a basis for those who promote suicidal nationalism, he said. He obviously misjudged the situation in opposing Ukrainian independence to maintain the Soviet regime. Four months after his visit, the Ukraine declared independence following a national referendum, delivering a firm slap in the face to the then-US leader.
Now, President Bush is treating the Taiwan Strait issue in a similar fashion. He also wishes to maintain the stability of the Chinese Communist Party regime, and understates the nationalistic desires of the Chinese. He believes that Beijing has firmly established a Chinese identity, that the Taiwanese public identifies with China and that nationalistic independence and nation building will bring instability to the region. His government has repeatedly declared its opposition to Taiwanese independence, and warns against its danger.
In reality, would Taiwan go the same way as the Ukraine? Ukrainian independence spurred a wave of independence among non-Russian ethnic groups. Would Taiwanese independence ignite the separatist desires in Tibet, Xinjiang, or maybe even Hong Kong?
Since Ukraine's independence, Taiwanese have learned that although the US and the Soviet Union cooperated in blocking Ukrainian independence, and the Ukraine also had unification supporters similar to Ma, the Ukrainians courageously escaped the Soviet Union's imperialist oppression through a national referendum and brought forth the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
Would Taiwan's independence also bring about China's dissolution, or as Ma proposes, only cause China to attack Taiwan?
Allen Houng is a professor in the Institute of Neuroscience at National Yang Ming University.
TRANSLATED BY ANGELA HONG
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at