The visit by China’s Taiwan Affairs Office Minister Zhang Zhijun (張志軍) last week was welcomed by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which said that efforts on both sides to engage in dialogue and increase contacts should be encouraged.
Be that as it may, the party’s approach to the cross-strait relationship bears closer examination.
During Zhang’s four-day stay in Taiwan, protesters tailed him all the way.
The first-ever visit to Taiwan by a Chinese official in charge of Taiwan affairs in the 65 years since the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) Republic of China government retreated to Taiwan in 1949 was seen by activists as a golden opportunity to express opposition to China’s top Taiwan policymaker about China’s attempts to annex Taiwan economically and politically over the decades.
It could have been an opportunity for politicians to drum up publicity and support for their campaigns in the year-end seven-in-one local elections. However, very few DPP local politicians showed up at the protests, unlike their Taiwan Solidarity Union counterparts.
DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) party statement about the visit was also insipid.
Tsai commended Zhang for “showing good will” by saying that China respects the “social system and lifestyle” the nation has chosen and that Beijing wants to “share its economic achievements with Taiwan rather than to swallow Taiwan’s economy.”
The meeting between DPP heavyweight Greater Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊) and Zhang was no different from the meetings Zhang had with her two KMT counterparts, New Taipei City Mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫) and Greater Taichung Mayor Jason Hu (胡志強) — they were held behind closed doors and not in a city government building, where a national flag would be flown.
According to what was relayed to the press, the issues brought up by Chen, Chu and Hu at their separate meetings with Zhang were all similar in nature: They opposed the view held by China that the future of Taiwan is for China to decide; they identified problems with cross-strait economic engagement which needed to be addressed, such as favoritism of big businesses, nepotism and cronyism; and they all sought Zhang’s support for their cities’ planned regional bids and initiatives to increase economic ties with China.
As far as cross-strait relations are concerned, the DPP has long been in an awkward position. On the one hand, it must persuade swing voters, a considerable number of which may favor the KMT’s cross-strait policies, that it can conduct normalized exchanges with the Chinese Communist Party capably if in power. On the other hand, it needs to retain the support of voters championing Taiwanese independence.
The DPP’s response to Zhang’s visit again exposed the party’s awkwardness.
As the DPP now stands a good chance of winning the 2016 presidential election, none of the following should be surprising: It interpreted the remarks Zhang made in Taiwan as “good will” rather than a united front ploy, even though it must have known that Beijing’s “respect for Taiwan’s choice in social system and lifestyle” is tantamount to “one country, two systems.”
It arranged for Chen to meet Zhang at a hotel and yielded to his request that they meet behind closed doors, even though the party demanded transparency from Zhang’s meeting with Mainland Affairs Council Minister Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦). And it called for closer economic ties between Greater Kaohsiung and China, even though it had repeatedly warned the government against the risks of such overreliance.
The visit casts doubt over whether the DPP can be trusted to deal with the cross-strait relationship in a less subservient way than the KMT government has.
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