China, a self-proclaimed ancient civilization, has stooped to furtively trying to include Taiwan as part of its national map by including it in the new People’s Republic of China (PRC) passports.
In this way, it has tried to lay claim to Taiwan’s sovereignty and disputed territories claimed by China and three other countries.
In the face of the Chinese threat, India, the Philippines and Vietnam have all staged strong protests, and the US has refused to endorse China’s claim.
However, in Taiwan, despite Presidential Office spokesman Fan Chiang Tai-chi’s (范姜泰基) protest on Nov. 23, it seems that President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) does not dare to strongly dispute the claim.
This underhanded trick on the part of China is simply Beijing’s realization of the logical conclusion of Ma’s rather optimistic “one China, with each side having its own interpretations (一中各表).”
If he denounces China’s claim, Beijing will surely argue that each side has its own interpretations of “one China.”
What can he do except beg the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which has indulged his administration from Day One, to give him a break in return for his successful deception of Taiwanese voters?
In response to China’s audacity, Ma has decided to retaliate in a “civilized” way, so Beijing is unlikely to gain international support under such circumstances, even if it loses its temper.
Meanwhile, he hopes that his dignified response, conforming to universal values as it does, will give Taiwanese a sense of glory that has faded in recent years, and might even boost his dire support ratings.
However, what is Ma’s so-called “civilized” response?
This is a question that he needs to ask himself. Since the CCP’s 18th National Congress ended not long ago, he has gone out of his way to play the “yes man,” refusing, for example, to issue a visa to the Dalai Lama. Is this civilized? Is this glorious?
Shame on him. Especially given the alarming state of the economy at the moment, those in power should perhaps be encouraging spiritual leaders to visit Taiwan to give members of the public some kind of spiritual comfort. The authorities claim that the timing of the Dalai Lama’s proposed visit was “inappropriate.”
However, in my opinion, the timing of the visit is perfect, and Taiwan should approve his application and issue him a visa immediately. Ma does not need to comment, because there is no need to shout when one retaliates. Even school children understand that this is called “diplomatic retaliation.”
Since time immemorial, retaliation has been a recognized part of foreign relations. What one might term the “equivalence principle” is an unwritten rule, that of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.”
By responding to like with like, Taiwan can maintain its dignity, and clarify its stance clearly and definitely. It can also prevent such pernicious attempts to test it, and ultimately prevent the risk of war.
Why is the issue harmful to Taiwan?
Although this Chinese trick is unlikely to be significant in terms of the recognition of national territory within the international community, as indeed the US Department of State has pointed out, Taiwan should clarify its stance and take action in order to warn China not to take advantage of it.
If Ma dares not denounce Beijing’s actions and take retaliatory measures, then he is not fit for his post and should resign for being a lousy president.
Christian Fan Jiang is deputy secretary-general of the Northern Taiwan Society.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with