The Ministry of Transportation and Communications cried foul this week after China took advantage of Taiwan in the allocation of cross-strait flights for next week’s Lunar New Year holiday.
Of the 350 extra flights laid on for the expected increase in cross-strait travel during the holiday period, Taiwanese airlines were only allocated 98, compared with 252 flights for Chinese airlines. To add insult to injury, the departure slots awarded to Taiwanese airlines for major Chinese cities are at extremely inconvenient times.
The imbalance occurred after the Chinese rejected numerous flight requests by Taiwanese carriers on “technical” grounds, while Taiwan accepted all of China’s applications.
While the government may have expected it would be granted the same number of flights as China during this busy period, it should not be news to officials that China does not view Taiwan as its equal and will resort to almost anything to get the upper hand.
What was the Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA) doing while this was playing out? If it wanted to ensure flights were distributed equally, then why did it not notice a pattern developing and bring it up with its Chinese counterpart?
CAA Director-General Lee Long-wen (李龍文) may have been right on Tuesday when he said the Chinese airlines would not necessarily benefit from the extra flights as the occupation rate for Taiwanese airlines was currently much higher, but his comments smack of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted, and hint at an official trying to cover up for his organization’s incompetence.
The government would be well within its rights to inform China it is canceling a certain number of flights in retaliation for the lack of fairness in distribution, but that is highly unlikely given this administration’s lack of backbone when it comes to dealing with its cross-strait adversary.
In fact, this order of affairs is fully consistent with the pattern that has developed over the last 20 months of exchanges between Taiwan and China since this government came to power.
Before any talks start, Taiwan announces its bottom line, saying the announcement will not compromise the nation’s interests or sovereignty while putting on a show for consumption by the Taiwanese public. Then, when China refuses to budge, Taiwan caves in to its demands and tries to pass off its capitulation as a show of Chinese “goodwill” that serves the best interests of Taiwan.
The pattern is all too familiar, while the outcome is always the same. China gets exactly what it wants while Taiwan ends up compromising.
And while this issue may not be that important to most people — as long as passengers get home, they probably don’t care which airline they take — it has ominous implications.
If this government and its agencies are unwilling to stand up to China on such a trivial matter as flight arrangements, there is little chance they will stand up for Taiwan’s interests and block Beijing’s trickery on more important issues.
With negotiations over an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) now under way, this is an extremely worrying prospect.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS