As a researcher, I often sigh over Taiwan’s current diplomatic predicament. In particular, it looks as if President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration may not know where the nation’s diplomatic strengths lie or how to put them to good use.
During the 2008 presidential election campaign, Ma pledged that if he were elected, cultural concerns would guide his policies.
He emphasized that Taiwan’s key strength is its cultural heritage, and that as a small country, it can only compete with large countries and push for sustainable development by making use of its cultural heritage.
In 2011, in response to the rapidly growing number of China’s Confucius Institutes (孔子學院), Taiwan established Taiwan Academies (台灣書院) in the three largest cities in the US as a step toward its goal of “cultural diplomacy.”
However, just like China’s Confucius Institutes, Taiwan Academies are haunted by politics. Therefore, the establishment of the academies overseas has not been as smooth as expected. Especially in certain countries with close relations with China, the academies are often named Chinese-language schools, instead of Taiwan Academies.
If the government really wanted to push ahead with its cultural diplomacy, it could use Taiwan’s rich experience and strength in Chinese-language education to establish Taiwan Education Centers (台灣教育中心) focusing on Chinese-language training and use that as a means to achieve the goals of the Taiwan academies.
However, the Ministry of Education clearly lacks the determination to push for such a policy, and it even seems to want to reject Ma’s ambitions.
As a result, the ministry has closed or reduced the size of Taiwan Education Centers in several Asian countries, including Vietnam, South Korea and Thailand, claiming that the schools’ performance was poor. The move has caused a lot of international criticism that Taiwan is breaking its promises.
Ironically, the ministry has actually increased the number of Taiwan Education Centers that do not teach Chinese language in Japan and the US.
Former minister of education Wu Ching-ji (吳清基) once promised to establish five Taiwan Education Centers in India, but the ministry broke that promise and reduced the number of centers to two, using administrative means to amend the related regulations and blaming insufficient resources.
Even worse, a key education official bluntly said that the global advancement of Chinese-language education is not the ministry’s responsibility.
The fact is that the ministry’s policy thinking does not include an overall strategy for cultural diplomacy, and it is trying to shirk its responsibilities.
Such shortsighted bureaucratic attitudes are killing the possibility for Taiwan to give full play to its influence through cultural diplomacy that would be able to help expand the nation’s international space.
If the situation remains unchanged, Ma will not be able to achieve his goal of letting cultural concerns guide policy. Such half-baked cultural diplomacy would only serve to increase Taiwan’s problems.
Chang Chi-shin is a post-doctoral research fellow in the Institute of Law for Science and Technology at National Tsing Hua University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past