Former vice president Lien Chan (連戰) may go down in history as the first — and last — “winner” of the Confucius Peace Prize, after the Chinese Ministry of Culture reportedly ordered that this year’s award ceremony should be scrapped.
Or maybe not.
The news out of Beijing about the prize, and who organizes it, is just as mixed up and farcical as it was last year, when a group of academics and other “Chinese patriots” announced the award and then went on to present it just one day before the Nobel committee in Norway awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to jailed Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波).
The Confucius prize had first been suggested in an opinion piece in the Global Times, owned by Chinese Communist Party mouthpiece the People’s Daily, shortly after the award to Liu had been announced to much gnashing of teeth and howls of protest in Beijing. The apparatchiks condemned the award to Liu as a Western plot against China that had hurt the feelings of the Chinese people. Lo and behold, just three weeks later, a group headed by “Confucius Peace Prize jury chairman” Tan Changliu (譚長流) announced that Lien had won the inaugural Confucius award for his contribution to the development of cross-strait relations and world peace.
At the time, Tan said his organization was a private group with no links to the Chinese government and that they had been preparing for years to create an award to promote world peace from an “Eastern” perspective. Most people had a hard time believing him.
At the award ceremony in Beijing, which was even more chaotic than the initial press conference, Lien was a no-show and a little girl was hauled up before the cameras to accept the stack of cash that was supposed to be the US$15,000 prize. A brochure handed out at the ceremony declared that given its huge population, China should have more of a say about world peace than tiny Norway.
Undeterred by last year’s mess, earlier this month the China Native Art Association’s Culture Protection Bureau announced its list of candidates for this year’s Confucius prize: the Beijing-appointed Panchen Lama (as opposed to the one recognized by the Dalai Lama), Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, South African President Jacob Zuma and 81-year-old Chinese agricultural scientist Yuan Longping (袁龍萍), who first developed hybrid rice species in the 1970s.
The clear winner on that list would appear to be Yuan, whose contribution to crop productivity helped reduce famine in many areas and thereby contributed to world peace as much as Kenya’s environmental campaigner and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Wangari Maathai did with her tree-planting and campaigns to empower rural women. Given the choice of Lien, however, the jury would probably go for Putin.
This week, the art association announced in a message on the culture ministry Web site that the bureau had been disbanded and the second Confucius award was canceled. The ministry said the bureau had not received permission to promote the event and again disavowed any connection to the prize.
Yet that same day the award’s chairman said there would still be an award ceremony in December and that other organizations were competing to sponsor the prize.
Perhaps it was all the embarrassing headlines surrounding last year’s debacle — not good considering Beijing’s push to get its Confucius Institutes into more countries and universities. Or perhaps the Beijing mandarins don’t want another reminder of how far they have strayed from Confucius’ own teachings that stressed the need for moral rulers, leading by example and judicial equality.
Given his belief that an “oppressive government is fiercer and more feared than a tiger,” Confucius might have found himself sharing a jail cell with Liu instead of dining with the elite at Zhongnanhai.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers