The Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Tuesday lodged a “strong protest” with the Philippines over a ruling in its Court of Appeals which, citing the “one China” policy, upheld the Philippine Bureau of Immigration’s decision to deport 14 Taiwanese fraud suspects to China.
Aside from sending the protest via telegraph to Manila, Minister of Foreign Affairs Timothy Yang (楊進添) said he had on Monday told Philippine Representative to Taiwan Antonio Basilio that “the ruling was unacceptable to Taiwan,” warning that “we will not exclude any possible measures of protest.” So the foreign minister shows that he can talk tough. But how seriously does the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government think the Philippine government will take Taiwan’s complaint in light of the previous objection lodged by the foreign ministry, which ended with Taiwan wimping out?
In February, the KMT government’s protest against Manila’s decision to deport the 14 suspects to China appeared stern in its demand of a formal apology from the Philippines. It also recalled Taiwan’s representative to Manila and imposed a four-month freeze on Philippine nationals coming to Taiwan to work. Just as Taiwan’s public was about to laud the administration under President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) for finally showing some backbone by sticking up for Taiwan’s dignity, however, the Ma government softened its stance. Following a visit by Philippine presidential envoy Manuel Roxas, who did not meet Taipei’s demand for an apology, the foreign ministry suggested that the punitive actions taken by the Philippine government against its officials involved in the deportation would be interpreted by Taipei as “a kind of apology,” hence putting a stop to the row with the Philippines.
Truly pathetic. Considering the way Taiwan’s demand for an apology ended then, how convincing is the Ma administration now when it expects the public to believe that it truly would uphold Taiwan’s authority and dignity with its latest so-called “stern protest”?
Addressing a group of foreign panelists at this year’s International Law Association Asia-Pacific Regional Conference in Taipei yesterday, Ma gave himself a pat on the back that his administration’s ostensible efforts to ease cross-strait tensions have helped expand Taiwan’s participation in international organizations, again trumpeting his principle of “mutual non--recognition of each other’s sovereignty and mutual non-denial of each other’s jurisdiction” with regard to China.
However, if Ma believes that his so-called “mutual non-denial” principle has helped Taiwan gain more breathing room in the international community, why is it that all Taiwanese see is repeated denials of the Republic of China (ROC)? From the recent disclosure of an internal WHO memo that affirmed its denigration of Taiwan’s status to a “province of China,” to the visa exemptions from Croatia and Slovenia — which, respectively, refer to Taiwan as “Taiwan, People’s Republic of China (PRC)” and place it under the category “China” along with Hong Kong and Macau — to the latest decision by the Philippines’ Court of Appeals upholding the “one China” principle in its ruling, seem like a series of affirmations recognizing the PRC. All the while, the Ma administration has dismissed the ROC’s sovereignty and dignity on the international stage.
Can Ma enlighten Taiwan’s public on how exactly his “mutual non-denial” principle plays out to Taiwan’s benefit? Thus far, it appears that Ma is living in a bubble of his own made up of naivety and a false sense of thawing cross-strait relations.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi on Monday announced that she would dissolve parliament on Friday. Although the snap election on Feb. 8 might appear to be a domestic affair, it would have real implications for Taiwan and regional security. Whether the Takaichi-led coalition can advance a stronger security policy lies in not just gaining enough seats in parliament to pass legislation, but also in a public mandate to push forward reforms to upgrade the Japanese military. As one of Taiwan’s closest neighbors, a boost in Japan’s defense capabilities would serve as a strong deterrent to China in acting unilaterally in the
RSS