President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said last week that the Dalai Lama would not be welcome to visit Taiwan anytime soon. The Presidential Office said such a visit, given the current state of cross-strait affairs, would undo its efforts, and that Ma’s decision was based on national interest. This view ignores the existence of Taiwan and only takes aim at short-term benefits.
Since the question was hypothetical — the Dalai Lama hasn’t applied for permission to visit — Ma could have avoided controversy by simply pointing this out. Instead, he chose to say the Tibetan spiritual leader would not be welcome. His statement was clearly aimed at currying favor with China. Even if such a visit had been in the cards, Ma could have stressed that it was purely for religious reasons, and that he would not meet the monk. Instead, Ma caved in completely.
China sees the Dalai Lama as the leader of the Tibetan independence movement. His every move is followed by Chinese protests and suppression. In advance of his meeting on Saturday with French President Nicolas Sarkozy — who currently holds the rotating EU presidency — Beijing tried to intimidate Sarkozy by postponing a planned EU-China summit. The US, Germany and Canada have received similar treatment as a result of the Dalai Lama’s visits, but the leaders of these democracies have insisted on allowing him to visit and meeting with him. They do so out of concern for Tibetan human rights, democracy and religious freedom and because the Dalai Lama insists on achieving Tibetan autonomy through peaceful means.
The cross-strait relationship is indeed important to Taiwan and we all hope the two sides will be able to coexist peacefully. The cross-strait relationship, however, is not the same as the national interest — a free economy, democracy, human rights and national dignity are more important. Because the two sides of the Taiwan Strait have divergent views of these supposedly universal values, it makes no sense to sacrifice Taiwan’s longstanding pursuit of these values for the sake of cross-strait relations.
Ma’s public rejection of a visit by the Dalai Lama will have far reaching consequences. Taiwan will now be seen as working together with China to intimidate the Dalai Lama. Taiwan has long claimed to be a representative of democracy, freedom and human rights in the face of bullying and intimidation by China. Most countries may have sacrificed Taiwan because of Chinese pressures and their own national interests, but they remain sympathetic to Taiwan.
Ma has shot Taiwan in the foot: If Taiwan can’t resist Chinese pressure, then how could we ask for international support?
Taiwanese democracy and human rights have deteriorated since Ma became president. Currying favor with a neighbor that has more than 1,000 missiles aimed at Taiwan and treating the cross-strait relationship as the only national interest is tantamount to bowing to brute force by refusing to allow a visit by an international symbol of human rights, religious freedom and democracy.
Ma has seriously damaged Taiwan, but there may still be a solution. Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) has suggested that religious organizations invite the Dalai Lama to visit as a religious leader, as was the case before. This could be the way to save Taiwan’s international image.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS