Does an air defense identification zone (ADIZ) involve sovereignty? According to President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration, the answer is apparently not a definite “yes.”
On May 29, 2010, in a statement released in response to Japan’s proposed plan to expand its ADIZ westward, which would leave it overlapping parts of Taiwan’s ADIZ, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it found Japan’s decision unacceptable, as it would affect Taiwan’s airspace and national sovereignty.
Fast-forward to Tuesday and the Ma government’s stance has changed noticeably.
In his first public comment on China’s East China Sea ADIZ that includes the disputed Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台), which both Taiwan and Japan also claim sovereignty over, Ma said Beijing’s move does not involve “airspace” or “territorial sovereignty.”
In other words, in the eyes of the Ma government, an ADIZ was a matter of national integrity and sovereignty three years ago, but not now.
This striking difference is not only absurd, but baffling for many, who wonder whether it may be yet another example of the cowardly Ma government lacking the backbone to stick up for the nation’s authority and dignity when it comes to dealing with Beijing.
Furthermore, many cannot help but wonder what constitutes treason if a head of state blatantly harbors double standards that appear tantamount to assisting Beijing in violating Taiwan’s sovereignty.
In fact, as long ago as December 2007, then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) sounded a warning over China’s possible move to designate a new ADIZ. In remarks with then-visiting US Representative Eni Faleomavaega, who at the time doubled as the chairman of the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and the Global Environment, Chen specifically noted that “we consider China’s plans an attempt to alter the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. They will pose a great threat to peace and stability in the Strait and damage the status quo. We hope the US and Japan will jointly tackle this serious issue.”
Ma is fond of comparing himself with Chen and claims to have more international vision than his predecessor. However, we need to look at how pathetically Ma has failed in the defense of the nation’s sovereignty.
Following China’s declaration of its new ADIZ, Japan aligned itself with the US in condemning the move and refusing to comply with Beijing’s rules for aircraft flying through the zone. South Korea and Australia subsequently expressed their grave concern over the matter, condemning China.
Taiwan, under Ma’s leadership, however, has been relatively quiet, and the government has failed to assert the nation’s dignity.
Not a single word of condemnation nor protest was uttered by the Ma administration, just quiet rhetoric expressing regret.
The high-profile welcome for China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits Chairman Chen Deming (陳德銘) has been in stark contrast. This no doubt creates an impression within the international community that Taiwan is aligning itself with Beijing rather than the democracies of Japan, South Korea and the US.
Ma often claims that tensions across the Strait have been “dramatically reduced” under his presidency, thereby “contributing to regional stability and prosperity.”
However, if this so-called reduction in cross-strait tension is achieved purely through failure on the part of the government to defend Taiwan’s dignity and sovereignty, what good is this fraudulent cross-strait “peace”?
Despite Ma’s trumpeting of the Republic of China’s sovereignty in his speeches, he has wimped out on the international stage.
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath