The Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) administration’s basic idea for cross-strait interaction is the so-called “1992 consensus” and getting each side of the Taiwan Strait to abstain from denying the existence of the other. There was some understanding for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) not agreeing to these premises and goals, but anyone who could or would be willing to understand the Ma administration’s actions is totally confused.
The administration considers it reasonable to remain silent or protest in a low-key manner when President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is referred to as “Mr” by China or when Beijing calls the Republic of China (ROC) the “Taiwan Area,” but harshly refutes any statements that Taiwan is a province or a part of China. But in what way is it respectful to the presidency and the ROC when Ma says that he is comfortable being referred to as “Mr Ma” and when he refers to Taiwan as an “area?”
Apart from terrifying the DPP, Ma has probably made the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) happy beyond its wildest dreams. How could this be construed as mutual non-denial? It is outright self-denial!
Ma’s handling of other matters has also left the public stunned and speechless. His administration was “pragmatic” to the point of humiliating Taiwan in seeking admission to the UN’s specialized organizations. When Chinese Ambassador to the UN Wang Guangya (王光亞) rejected Taiwan’s entrance, Taipei should have issued a strong protest. The Presidential Office spokesperson, however, spoke up for China as if he was the spokesperson for Beijing’s UN delegation.
Then there was Ma’s backtracking on national defense. Taiwan has cruise missiles with a reach of 500km to 600km, capable of attacking military facilities along the Fujian coast. We were about to make a breakthrough in the development of the Hsiung Feng 2E cruise missile, which would have reached of 800km to 1,000km, and would allow Taiwan to hit second-line military facilities such as airports.
A reasonable military strategy would dictate that development of these missiles be completed. If substantial military concessions are made between China and Taiwan, we could consider maintaining existing capability but forego mass production and deployment. However, considering China’s rapid increases in national defense spending, research and development and expanding deployments, the Ma administration had no reason to stop the Hsiung Feng 2E program. The Chinese probably didn’t believe their ears. Unfortunately for Taiwan, it was all too true.
When the DPP was in power, the national strategy was to maintain a clear definition of Taiwanese sovereignty and to state that there was one country on each side of the Taiwan Strait. This was in line with mainstream public opinion. However, this strategy caused a freeze in cross-strait relations and hurt relations between the pan-green and pan-blue camps as well as between China, the US and Taiwan.
The Ma administration has a different strategy and maybe they cannot be blamed for making the change given eight years of chilly relations. However, the government has gone directly against Taiwan’s sovereign interests and mainstream public opinion.
Simply put, the former Chen administration was characterized by a clear stance, but its overly hasty policies and rash actions hurt Taiwan’s interests and the feelings of the public.
Ma, however, has severely damaged Taiwan’s sovereignty, its fundamental interests and planted the seeds for long-term mistrust. The only way to resolve these problems is by kicking Ma out of office!
Lee Wen-chung is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Drew Cameron
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with