Taiwanese took to the polls on Saturday and voted for a “status quo” that has already ceased to exist. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) campaigned on the grounds that if he were not re-elected, cross-strait relations would revert back to the standoff that he imagines existed under former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). His campaign effectively connected his presidency with this vaunted “status quo.”
In Taiwan over the years, the term “status quo” has taken on a strong emotional connotation, like the word “peace” in Japan or “freedom” in the US. Merriam-Webster defines “status quo” as an “existing state of affairs.” In Taiwan, this originally meant a state of affairs in which the Republic of China (ROC) ruled over Taiwan, while the People’s Republic of China (PRC) governed China. The ROC and the PRC claimed each other’s territories, did not acknowledge each other’s existence and basically engaged in a perpetual standoff that was prolonged by China’s intense poverty and Taiwan’s relative affluence.
However, the “status quo” was irrevocably changed by the advent of democracy. The state of affairs up to 1996 was of a virtual Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) dictatorship facing off against a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) dictatorship across the Taiwan Strait. That rapidly changed when martial law was revoked and democracy was instituted. Although many Taiwanese still hold the idea of a “status quo” dear to their hearts, it has long since gone, never to return.
In China, Taiwanese businesspeople were also busy destroying the “status quo” by investing billions of US dollars, building factories and basically propelling that country into the modern economic realm. China’s growth since then is something that only science fiction writers with the wildest imaginations could have predicted.
Then came former president Lee Teng-hui’s (李登輝) “special state-to-state” model of cross-strait relations speech in 1998, all but saying that Taiwan is an independent country. This is something that would never have occurred under the former “status quo” of a nationalist ROC squaring off against a communist PRC, both sides claiming sole legitimacy over China. For the first time, an ROC leader was acknowledging the fact that Taiwan was, is and would likely always be separate from China.
Since Lee established that new “status quo,” it has been repeated by pan-green and pan-blue politicians alike. Chen never missed a chance to refer to Taiwan as a sovereign, independent country and Ma has done the same, saying it is up to the 23 million Taiwanese to decide the nation’s future.
The “status quo” under Chen was of an independent nation that was increasingly tied to China through trade. Economic relations boomed during those eight years, despite the chilly political surface.
When Ma became president he booted that “status quo” out the window once again. Instead of the “state-to-state” relationship, cross-strait ties under Ma would now better be defined as an overlord subject relationship. Ma’s administration has ushered in the first era in which an ROC government has ever kowtowed to the PRC. That would have been unthinkable in the “status quo” of the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s.
Taiwan’s “status quo” throughout the years has been exactly the opposite of stable, and Ma’s continued presence in the presidential office is proof of that.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS