At first glance, a government united — as opposed to divided — would seem to be diplomatically stronger in dealing with foreign nations.
That might not hold true when it comes to Taiwan’s interaction with China, especially with the government in the hands of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), the party whose ultimate goal is unifying Taiwan with China. The KMT’s hand is further weakened by the must-do list of president-elect Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九).
Worse still, the KMT, by virtue of its control of all branches of government, would run out of excuses for not complying with Beijing’s wishes given the alliance pact that former KMT chairman Lien Chan formed with the Chinese Communist Party. Beijing’s heightened expectations could spell disaster for the Taiwanese.
As soon as Ma scored a resounding victory over Democratic Progressive Party candidate Frank Hsieh (謝長廷), he floated the balloon of the dual interpretation of “one China” as a basis for cross-strait talks aimed at bringing about direct links.
Three days later in a telephone conversation with US President George W. Bush, Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) echoed Ma’s idea with rare enthusiasm.
The fact remains that, while Beijing is encouraging Ma to snow the Taiwanese with his fairytale world of the existence of a Republic of China (ROC) that encompasses modern-day Mongolia, Taiwan and China, direct links would only be possible if Ma formally agrees to Beijing’s “one China” policy or agrees that the links are “domestic” in nature.
Beijing’s policy stipulates that there is “one China,” which goes by the name of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), and that Taiwan is part of China.
Ma’s consent would be instrumental in taking the first step to conceding Taiwan’s sovereignty to Beijing and thus making the US’ Taiwan Relations Act groundless as the nation is transformed into a “domestic” region of China.
During the presidential race, Ma agreed that Taiwan is a sovereign nation and that the 23 million Taiwanese have the sole right to decide the fate of the nation’s future status. It should follow that a referendum on unification would have to be conducted and affirmed before formal agreement on direct links can be inked, inconsistent with Ma’s guarantee of realizing direct links within one year of taking office.
The road to a formal peace accord might likewise be replete with insurmountable hurdles, not the least of which could be the prerequisite of implementing China’s “Anti-Secession” Law in Taiwan. That would inevitably destabilize Taiwan for years.
Ma’s prescriptions for Taiwan’s perceived economic ills carry grim side effects.
Nevertheless, direct links and a peace accord would constitute the backbone by which Ma would forge a cross-strait common market to provide Taiwan with lasting and painless economic prosperity. Such a feat would be comparable to Ma — with Taiwan in tow — walking on water.
Given that Taiwan does not deserve to sink even though many voters were convinced they should entrust Ma with these impossible tasks, Taiwanese might just welcome a jettison of these unattainable plans now that the election is over.
But the KMT holds a strong hand when dealing for itself within the scope of Beijing’s “one China.”
Huang Jei-hsuan
California
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
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.
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