Former vice president Lien Chan (連戰) met Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) at the APEC leaders’ summit in Lima on Friday. APEC is one of a handful of international bodies of which Taiwan is an official member and this was the first time such senior Taiwanese and Chinese leaders met at one of its summits. The meeting was symbolic for both sides, but nothing more than that.
Although the meeting was an indication of reduced cross-strait tension, Taiwan should not rush to celebrate. In no way does it mean that China is willing to recognize Taiwan’s sovereignty, or that Taiwan can now deal with China on an equal footing internationally. Beijing’s leadership saw the meeting as one between friends that had nothing to do with Taiwan’s international status.
China’s treatment of the Lien-Hu meeting was molded by political considerations. Although the meeting took place at the APEC summit, the arrangements differed from the bilateral meetings between leaders of other APEC members. Xinhua news agency, for example, never once mentioned Hu’s status as Chinese president, referring to him instead as Chinese Communist Party general secretary, while Lien was called honorary chairman of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), thereby avoiding portraying the meeting as one between China’s president and the representative of Taiwan’s top leader. China’s foreign minister did not accompany Hu for the Lien meeting. Instead, Wang Yi (王毅), head of the Taiwan Affairs Office, was flown over, to emphasize that it was a party-to-party, not a state-to-state meeting.
Both Lien and Hu described the meeting as one between old friends. Speaking of Hu in flattering terms, Lien scarcely mentioned the things Taiwanese really want from China — peace, equality, dignity and prosperity. Nothing important was discussed and the meeting served no practical purpose.
Although US President George W. Bush is a lame duck leader, he is still the head of a great power. Diplomacy therefore required that he hold a bilateral meeting with Hu. The two did not depart from the standpoints they have held at past meetings. Hu reminded Bush that the Taiwan question is a vital matter for Beijing and remains the most important and sensitive aspect of China-US relations. He also stressed that his government would never depart from its “one China” stance. Bush reiterated that the US maintains a “one China” policy guided by the Taiwan Relations Act and the three US-China joint declarations. He also urged China to talk to the Dalai Lama, and once more expressed his commitment to religious freedom. Although there are many issues on which Bush and Hu do not formally agree, at least they are willing to exchange views and expound their positions on an equal footing.
No great practical results were to be expected from Hu’s meetings with either Lien or Bush, but his meeting with Bush was a dialog between equals, while that with Lien was an exercise in control through conciliation. Although the Lima summit was the first at which Taiwan has been represented by such a senior figure as a former vice president, and although he managed to meet the Chinese president, this shows only that China is taking a more flexible approach in its dealings with Taiwan. It does not signify any change in Beijing’s “one China” policy. Taiwan should not allow the APEC meeting to lull it into a false sense of security.
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
To recalibrate its Cold War alliances, the US adopted its “one China policy,” a diplomatic compromise meant to engage with China and end the Vietnam War, but which left Taiwan in a state of permanent limbo. Half a century later, the costs of that policy are mounting. Taiwan remains a democratic, technologically advanced nation of 23 million people, yet it is denied membership in international organizations and stripped of diplomatic recognition. Meanwhile, the PRC has weaponized the “one China” narrative to claim sovereignty over Taiwan, label the Taiwan Strait as its “internal waters” and threaten international shipping routes that carry more
RSS