In the bigger picture, Taiwan and China are moving in the right direction. The old enemies have been talking to each other for the past four years and are creating peace in Asia.
Journalists, academics and politicians around the world are recognizing this. For decades, they have been witness to tensions between the two sides and consider current policies to be the right remedy for peace.
Several groundbreaking trade agreements have been signed, Chinese tourists are visiting Taiwan and cross-strait flights are a great success. Some observers’ say the situation could not be better. These observers see a need to oppose any arguments that could shake their version of the reality of cross-strait relations. If they challenge this reality, they will find that Taiwan’s democracy is in reverse gear.
Taiwan has fallen in the international democracy rankings and seen a large number of legal cases brought against opposition figures and the press has suffered a defeat as pro-China businessmen attempt to monopolize it. The nation’s international status has also been undermined. Its observer status in the WHO is subject to annual Chinese approval, the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement has not been submitted to the WTO and Taiwan has not obtained an international arbitration pact.
Since, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and certain observers think the state of China-Taiwan ties could not be better, they tend to consider the oppositions’ policies with skepticism. They demand new and modern policies that will not undermine the China-friendly approach.
However, are the KMT’s policies new and modern? It is hardly innovative to damage the nation’s democracy and undermine its international status. The party’s policies are not only out of date; they also counter the wishes of Taiwanese who want democracy and a strong sovereign status. So who is setting new standards for politics in the nation and can lead it toward a new “normal?”
The short answer is the youth. The long answer includes opposition parties, which continues to formulate modern policies. Yet it is the youth that are particularly interesting. A youth-led anti-media monopoly movement has organized campaigns about freedom and democracy. The Youth Alliance Against Media Monster has organized protests together with other groups such as the Association of Taiwan Journalists to fight media monopolization.
The University of Tasmania’s Mark Harrison writes on thechinastory.org about how the demonstrations have combined peaceful protests with local and international social media campaigns.
The activists have tried to embrace all Taiwanese and thus attempted to avoid a political labeled. This strategy may have the potential to include other social topics without being accused of being either in the pan-blue or pan-green camp.
As I and many others have pointed out, Taiwan needs a new political environment with a culture of debate and compromise. The youth can lead the way to devising a new standard for political activism and this could lead the nation to a new “normal.” A normal in which protests and debates are carried out with a clear vision in mind and in which all Taiwanese can band together without being labeled. Such a new normal is strongly needed in because the current problems facing the nation run deep among pan-blue and pan-green voters. Ultimately, one still needs to take a political stand in order to effect true change.
Those who believe that the cross-strait situation could not be better must answer why Taiwan should be measured using a different scale than what is used in Europe or in the US. Why do only EU and US citizens have the right to protect their country and liberty?
Michael Danielsen is chairman of Taiwan Corner, a Denmark based organization.
On March 22, 2023, at the close of their meeting in Moscow, media microphones were allowed to record Chinese Communist Party (CCP) dictator Xi Jinping (習近平) telling Russia’s dictator Vladimir Putin, “Right now there are changes — the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years — and we are the ones driving these changes together.” Widely read as Xi’s oath to create a China-Russia-dominated world order, it can be considered a high point for the China-Russia-Iran-North Korea (CRINK) informal alliance, which also included the dictatorships of Venezuela and Cuba. China enables and assists Russia’s war against Ukraine and North Korea’s
After thousands of Taiwanese fans poured into the Tokyo Dome to cheer for Taiwan’s national team in the World Baseball Classic’s (WBC) Pool C games, an image of food and drink waste left at the stadium said to have been left by Taiwanese fans began spreading on social media. The image sparked wide debate, only later to be revealed as an artificially generated image. The image caption claimed that “Taiwanese left trash everywhere after watching the game in Tokyo Dome,” and said that one of the “three bad habits” of Taiwanese is littering. However, a reporter from a Japanese media outlet
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework