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.
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath