When Beijing's hegemonic epithet for Taiwan's Olympic team made an unwelcome reappearance on China Central Television (CCTV) over the weekend, the response by the Taiwanese government was equally disappointing.
Reporting on taekwondo gold medalist Chu Mu-yen (朱木炎), CCTV again swapped the nation’s official Olympic name for Zhongguo Taibei. An apology from Beijing seems unlikely, however, judging from the Presidential Office’s timid statement on Sunday.
The re-emergence of this contrived moniker was bad news for President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who only a week earlier said that China had agreed to end its name game and so declared a diplomatic victory for his administration. For Ma, Beijing’s about-face was a scarce and sorely needed gesture of “goodwill” to combat critics at home who have said cross-strait “compromise” is a one-way street.
That may be why the office was reluctant to raise its voice over CCTV’s recent decision to keep using the non-official title, lest it erase the earlier triumph. Instead, the Presidential Office said it would monitor the situation, adding that CCTV had reportedly admitted to a “technical error.”
The government is not alone in its reluctance to react. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄), who last month bristled at the name change, is now strangely quiet. Wu had said he would cancel his trip to attend the Olympics if China continued to play “word games.”
But choosing not to issue an immediate protest this time was a risky tactic for Ma. The administration’s stern objection to altering Taiwan’s Olympic name was as important for the president’s image at home as it was for building trust with Beijing. Silence on the issue now could be interpreted as spinelessness, further compromising the nation’s bargaining position with China and eroding Ma’s already sagging approval ratings.
The timing was also awkward for Ma, who, on the same day as the Presidential Office’s ineffectual response to CCTV, touted his administration’s diplomatic prowess to a group of former foreign ministers. At a dinner honoring the officials, Ma sung the praises of agreeing to disagree, saying that his modus vivendi approach to foreign policy had already paid off.
But there is cause to object to this recurring theme. When Beijing’s Taiwan Affairs Office first dreamed up Zhongguo Taibei, Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平), after meeting with the president and premier, called on China to remember its consensus with Taiwan to set aside disputes. Unfortunately, there is scant evidence that Beijing sees itself as having reached any such deal. Instead, China seems more interested in testing the waters to see just how eager the new government is to maintain a show of “mutual goodwill.”
On Sunday, Ma said his “practical” approach would “protect the interests of the Republic of China” and “restore mutual trust” with other governments. The strategy had already improved relations with China as well as with allied nations, he said.
The sum of Ma’s many conciliatory remarks, however, has not put a stop to Beijing’s encroachment on Taiwan’s identity and international space. In that context, soft reactions to provocations like CCTV’s “error” may be setting the nation up for a hard fall when it becomes clear that Beijing was never interested in agreeing to disagree.
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
When Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) first suggested a mass recall of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, the Taipei Times called the idea “not only absurd, but also deeply undemocratic” (“Lai’s speech and legislative chaos,” Jan. 6, page 8). In a subsequent editorial (“Recall chaos plays into KMT hands,” Jan. 9, page 8), the paper wrote that his suggestion was not a solution, and that if it failed, it would exacerbate the enmity between the parties and lead to a cascade of revenge recalls. The danger came from having the DPP orchestrate a mass recall. As it transpired,
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
RSS