Three days after President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) again touted his “flexible diplomacy” policy, Sao Tomean President Manuel Pinto da Costa began a visit to China on Friday to seek investors in a deep-water port project in the country, which, according to an unnamed diplomatic source, would cost US$500 million.
As China has been using its economic clout vigorously to engage with Africa on all fronts over the past decade, wielding great influence over Africa’s development, it is getting harder to make a case that Taiwan matters much in Africa, and thus Taiwan stands to lose the diplomatic struggle in the continent.
This view is also held by the Ma administration. It is always quick to attribute undesired twists and turns in the development of relations with the country’s diplomatic allies to a single cause — its unwillingness to compromise on the underlying principles of Ma’s “diplomatic truce” approach, in which Taiwan and China should refrain from luring away each other’s allies by offering large amounts of aid.
In November last year, when the Gambia cut ties with Taiwan, the first ally Taiwan has lost since Ma became president in 2008, the explanation the administration offered was that it declined to satisfy Gambian President Yahya Jammeh’s request that Taiwan provide the country with more than US$10 million in cash with no strings attached.
The battle for allies between Taiwan and China is often characterized as “checkbook diplomacy,” in which both sides bribe countries for diplomatic recognition. This approach is unjustifiable and immoral because such hostile competition not only fuels corruption and interferes with domestic politics in the countries concerned, but sometimes props up dictatorships. Therefore, it would be commendable if the Ma administration were to stop playing tug-of-war with China.
However, putting the moves by Taiwan’s diplomatic allies toward China down to the Ma administration being both unable and unwilling to compete with Beijing in terms of checkbook diplomacy glosses over the real challenges and diminishes the actual problems related to the nation’s diplomatic policy.
It may be true that China has dissuaded a number of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies in Central and South America and the Caribbean from switching recognition to China, in an unprecedented gesture of goodwill, as some Chinese academics have said. That China has not accepted the Gambia’s offer to resume ties after the latter broke off relations with Taiwan was pretty much in the same vein.
One problem is that China’s policy regarding Taiwan on the diplomatic front cannot be calculated to arrive at a modus vivendi at all, as evidenced by recent incident in which Minister of Defense Yen Ming (嚴明) was denied a transit stop in South Africa en route from Swaziland to Burkina Faso, the latest in a long series of cases during Ma’s presidency showing China is never lenient regarding Taiwan’s diplomatic situation.
More seriously, because the Ma administration regards China as the key to its external relations, it never senses that bilateral relations between Taipei and each of its current 22 diplomatic allies are important in its overall foreign policy. The Ma administration’s external relations are centered mostly on relations with China, to the detriment of relations with other countries. The ever-decreasing budget allocated for foreign aid has fallen to a record low — less than 0.09 percent of GDP, together with the ongoing plan to downsize the country’s technical missions, suggests a lack of diplomatic vision. Furthermore, the government and the public are apparently indifferent to African issues.
With Guinea-Bissau gone in 1997, the Central African Republic in 1998, Liberia in 2003, Senegal in 2005, Chad in 2006, Malawi in 2008 and the Gambia last year, Taiwan now has diplomatic ties with just three African states, Sao Tome and Principe, Swaziland and Burkina Faso. Whether it will face even bleaker prospects in Africa depends not only on China, but also on Taiwan itself.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at