“Taiwanese must learn from yesterday’s Tibet, today’s Hong Kong and think about their country’s future. They must keep a vigilant eye,” Hong Kong activist James Lung (龍緯汶) cautioned at a recent forum held in Taipei.
These words of warning — which were quickly dismissed by some as an exaggeration — certainly come as a timely wake-up call to Taiwan amid talk of “promoting cross-strait development” by the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九).
Indeed, promotion of cross-strait ties is certainly to be encouraged if the exchanges expand Chinese understanding and appreciation of Taiwan’s democracy and inspire more freedom, human rights and a pro-democracy movement in China.
However, it is a different story if within the government’s slogan of “moving the cross-strait relationship forward” is hidden a political agenda that could instead lead Taiwan further into China’s grasp, and many Taiwanese have concerns over proposals recently suggested by Ma.
In his National Day speech last week, Ma said his government would continue its efforts to expand interaction across the Taiwan Strait on the basis of the so-called “1992 consensus,” adding that it “will thoroughly review and revise the Act Governing Relations between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例) and also push for both sides to set up offices in one another’s territory to serve the needs of businesses, students and the general public.”
On Tuesday, Straits Exchange Foundation Chairman Lin Join-sane (林中森) met with his Chinese counterpart, Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), in Beijing, expressing the hope that the two sides could soon begin negotiations on the setting up of representative offices in each other’s territory.
All this begs the question: What is the rush?
If, as Ma suggested, the purpose is to serve the needs of businesses, students and the general public, then why the need for redundancy when various government agencies and private business organizations have already set up offices in China for just such a purpose?
Many cannot help but wonder whether the representative offices touted by Ma are to have a political significance — reminding many Taiwanese of the Liaison Office of the Central People’s Government in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the representative body of Beijing in Hong Kong in 2000 to promote China’s implementation of its “one country, two systems” policy.
In the “Guidelines for National Unification” — which then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) said had “ceased to apply” in 2006 — the move to set up representative offices was billed as a “mid-term goal.”
Ma’s seeming rush to set up representative offices, in addition to his failure to explain to the Taiwanese people the doubts surrounding the status, purpose and function of the proposed offices, have added to wariness of his true intent.
Ma in his National Day speech also spoke of how “Taiwan’s democratic achievements have proven that democracy can take root and bear fruit within the framework of Chinese culture,” and that he believes Taiwan and China can also have a dialogue on democracy and the rule of law.
While the intention sounds good, Taiwanese must keep a watchful eye on the Ma administration to see whether the policies mapped out by the government truly spread the seeds of democracy in China or whether they play into the hand of Beijing’s “united front” (統戰) propaganda and end up landing Taiwan in a “unification soup.”
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
RSS