Were it not for the need to maintain decorum and show Taiwan’s best face to the sporting world, the boycott by Chinese athletes of the World Games opening ceremony would warrant symbolic retaliation. No matter the reason for the boycott — refusing to recognize President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) at the ceremony, or just boycotting for boycotting’s sake — and no matter how predictable such Chinese behavior may be, the snub directed at a democratically elected leader and the country he represents was deeply offensive and violated the goodwill that underlies international sporting competition.
The irony, of course, is that the Ma government is relying on Chinese goodwill to enhance electoral credibility and thus is averse to retaliation of any nature. Indeed, hardliners in the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislative caucus rushed to hail the snub as a masterstroke of cross-strait detente. Were it not for Chinese goodwill, they bleat, the Chinese athletes would not be coming at all.
KMT Legislator Wu Yu-sheng (吳育昇), one such hardliner, on Thursday praised negotiations between Taiwan’s Olympic authority, the Chinese Taipei Olympic Committee, and Chinese authorities that allegedly resulted in the boycott deal. The only sensible response to this self-destructive conduct is that the Chinese Taipei Olympic Committee has, yet again, matched its incompetence in sports management with backroom mischief-making worthy of the International Olympic Committee itself.
None of this comes as any surprise. It is, however, becoming more and more interesting to reflect on what degree of insulting Chinese conduct Ma will tolerate personally given his typically pallid response to this snub — let alone behavior targeting the people he was elected to lead.
The World Games give China an opportunity to place itself in an attractive light in an international context, especially in light of the latest butchery in Xinjiang. These are, after all, world games, not an athletic exercise to exhort Chinese power and glory.
So, when the Taiwanese placard and flag carriers for the Chinese team walked out into the stadium with a large hole behind them where the Chinese delegation should have been, the insult was not just directed at Ma, or Taiwan, or the crowd that applauded politely and booed in roughly equal measure, but also at the other athletes.
For most, this incident will fade in the memory as the Games continue. For unificationists, it will probably lead to self-congratulation over the minimal backlash. For independence activists, however, the incident will add fuel to the theory that this nation’s president is prepared to subject himself to any act of symbolic denigration from the Chinese Communist Party in order to feed his obsession with Greater China and the economic and geopolitical confectionary it creates.
For credulous observers who would interpret Ma’s refusal, yet again, to take China’s bait as signs of statesmanship and strategic aplomb, the time will come when Ma’s effete and barren leadership will falter under direct acts of Chinese coercion, shattering their fantasies of regional stability and cooperation.
Ma’s presence at the World Games opening ceremony offered hope that he was becoming more willing to use his prestige as president in an international context. The Chinese boycott, however, reminds us that things have not changed very much.
As an instance of disposable cowardice, the reaction of the government and the KMT adds to a body of evidence that this president, this government and the party machine remain unwilling to rally around the flag at those symbolic moments that count.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs