The US and China are the two countries with the biggest influence over Taiwan’s international role. So, how are Taiwan’s relations with these two big powers shaping up?
Despite all the news to the contrary, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) says that relations are smooth and relaxed. He has said that US-Taiwan relations are closer than they have been at any time during the past 30 years and that cross-strait relations are the best they have been in 60 years. If past presidents didn’t feel themselves standing at the edge of an abyss, they at least realized that they were treading on thin ice. None of them were as confident a Ma in the face of such dire international trends. Has Taiwan under Ma’s leadership really changed so much that it has left all its problems behind?
Of course not. Moreover, Taiwan’s foreign relations have now reached a critical imbalance. The arrest of Jacqueline Liu (劉姍姍), director-general of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office (TECO) in Kansas City, Missouri, by FBI agents and the meeting between Ma’s APEC envoy Lien Chan (連戰) and Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) at the recent APEC summit in Hawaii probably offer the most realistic image of the government’s interactions with the US and China: They are at the end of their tether, unable to cope with the situation.
Liu was accused of fraud in foreign labor contracting because her Philippine -housekeeper, who was hired to work 40 hours per week and receive a monthly salary of US$1,240, in fact had to work six days per week, 16 to 18 hours per day and received a much lower salary. Because Liu planned to leave the US as soon as the accusations appeared, the US prosecutor requested that she be detained without bail. This case raises at least five questions that need clarifying.
First, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) declared that this was the first time a Taiwanese diplomat had been arrested in the US since the bilateral Agreement on Privileges, Exemptions and Immunities (台美特權, 免稅暨豁免協定) was signed in 1980. If this statement is correct, it pokes a big hole in Ma’s statement that Taiwan-US relations are closer than they have been at any time in the past 30 years.
Second, the US prosecutor said that Taiwan was not a sovereign state and that its diplomats therefore did not enjoy diplomatic immunity. Surely this is symbolic, not of the closest, but of the frostiest, relationship between Taiwan and the US in the past 30 years.
Third, what is covered by the Agreement on Privileges, Exemptions and Immunities? Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) says that diplomats only enjoy immunity in the course of their official duties, but not when they act in a private capacity. The foreign ministry believes Liu enjoys immunity and has lodged a protest with US authorities both in Taiwan and in the US. Who is right?
Fourth, regardless of whether Taiwan and the US have different understandings, Taiwan’s foreign minister said that it was not necessary for the US to handle the matter in the manner it did, indirectly saying that the US should have informed Taiwan through diplomatic channels. If Taiwan’s representative office in the US handles relations with the US properly and according to protocol, that would not be asking much. That raises the question why US authorities chose to act the way they did.
Fifth, having caused relations with the US to deteriorate to such an undignified state, one cannot help but wonder what the staff at the representative office in Washington have been doing over the past four years. What have they done to mislead Ma to the point where he is so pleased with relations, deceiving the whole country?
If US relations are in such a shambles, then how about relations with China? When Lien met Hu in Honolulu, three actions in particular drew attention.
First, as the president’s special envoy, Lien referred to Ma as “Mr Ma” in his conversation with Hu. Second, Lien and Hu reiterated their common opposition to Taiwanese independence and insisted on the relevance of the so-called “1992 consensus.” Third, when Lien’s suggestion that a peace accord should be discussed at an opportune moment stirred up controversy, he said that he had been simply talking about “peaceful development.”
Because Hu rejects the title of president for Ma, Lien can only refer to Ma as “Mr Ma,” while Ma himself has to silently accept this state of affairs. Will he also swear allegiance and pay tribute by accepting that there is only “one China” by signing a peace accord?
If it is this humiliating, subservient slave mentality that he means when he says current cross-strait relations are the best they have been in 60 years, then this head of state is denigrating and humiliating Taiwan.
It would not be an exaggeration to say that the Ma administration is dealing with US and China relations by sitting on the fence trying to find out in which direction the wind blows.
Ma is a president who was out of the loop when a Taiwanese diplomat was arrested in the US, who couldn’t even insist on his own title being used in dealings with China and who is shrinking Taiwan’s living space to the point where it has to exist in the cracks of the international community, while still claiming to be proud of his achievements.
Why on earth would Taiwanese voters want to re-elect such a man?
Translated by Perry Svensson
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
RSS