China has said it will start using the controversial M503 air route, which it had designated unilaterally, today. Taiwan’s government has not only failed to put up any significant opposition, but even went as far as defending China’s actions — and this appeasement is only likely to put Taiwan in a more dangerous situation.
Members of the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) on Friday staged a surprise protest over the government’s inaction on China’s decision to implement the air route. Political activist groups blocked the main entrance of the Legislative Yuan while TSU legislators took over the podium to protest the air route, urging the government to take action.
Sadly, but not surprisingly, though the government said that it is not happy with the new air route, it still sides with China, instead of backing its own people as it should.
In fact, when China first announced the air route, which runs close to the median line in the Taiwan Strait — the de facto boundary between Taiwan and China — the government voiced its concerns over national security and protested, leading China to move the route to the west by six nautical miles (11km) and postpone its implementation.
Responding to China’s “compromise,” Mainland Affairs Council Minister Andrew Hsia (夏立言) said at the time that he was not satisfied.
However, when China pressed on and declared that it will start using the flight route, the government changed its mind overnight, and said that the decision was acceptable.
While the government might be powerless to overturn the decision, and the civilian flight route might not really pose a threat to Taiwan’s national security — as some government officials said — it does not mean that the government cannot at least express a firm opinion, especially considering that China had designated the flight route unilaterally, without consulting Taiwan.
The government’s reaction should not surprise anyone, because it has held a placatory attitude when dealing with cross-strait issues since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) took office in 2008, and the controversy surrounding the M503 flight route is only the latest example.
Ma has been bragging about his “achievements” in maintaining peaceful development in cross-strait relations, and the number of agreements that his government has signed with China during his term.
However, that the government under Ma’s leadership never hesitated to make concessions on just about everything to China in cross-strait talks, is nothing to be proud of.
Ma would even tell the public that some agreements must be signed, sometimes even going as far as saying that they should be inked before a certain date — putting pressure on Taiwan’s own negotiators and giving Chinese negotiators the upper hand.
No one negotiates like this, not in business — and never in politics.
Responding to criticism, Ma defended himself by saying that there is always “give and take” in negotiations. However, there is a big difference between “give” and “give up.”
Ma’s attitude in dealing with cross-strait issues might remind some people of former British prime minister Neville Chamberlain in the 1930s, who, in an effort to avoid a war with Nazi Germany, agreed to many unreasonable demands by Adolf Hitler.
Chamberlain’s appeasement policy eventually failed to spare millions of Europeans from war, and it is worrisome that Ma’s appeasement policy might also only serve to maintain a phony peaceful development in cross-strait relations.
The central bank and the US Department of the Treasury on Friday issued a joint statement that both sides agreed to avoid currency manipulation and the use of exchange rates to gain a competitive advantage, and would only intervene in foreign-exchange markets to combat excess volatility and disorderly movements. The central bank also agreed to disclose its foreign-exchange intervention amounts quarterly rather than every six months, starting from next month. It emphasized that the joint statement is unrelated to tariff negotiations between Taipei and Washington, and that the US never requested the appreciation of the New Taiwan dollar during the
The diplomatic dispute between China and Japan over Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s comments in the Japanese Diet continues to escalate. In a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, China’s UN Ambassador Fu Cong (傅聰) wrote that, “if Japan dares to attempt an armed intervention in the cross-Strait situation, it would be an act of aggression.” There was no indication that Fu was aware of the irony implicit in the complaint. Until this point, Beijing had limited its remonstrations to diplomatic summonses and weaponization of economic levers, such as banning Japanese seafood imports, discouraging Chinese from traveling to Japan or issuing
Since leaving office last year, former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has been journeying across continents. Her ability to connect with international audiences and foster goodwill toward her country continues to enhance understanding of Taiwan. It is possible because she can now walk through doors in Europe that are closed to President William Lai (賴清德). Tsai last week gave a speech at the Berlin Freedom Conference, where, standing in front of civil society leaders, human rights advocates and political and business figures, she highlighted Taiwan’s indispensable global role and shared its experience as a model for democratic resilience against cognitive warfare and
The diplomatic spat between China and Japan over comments Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi made on Nov. 7 continues to worsen. Beijing is angry about Takaichi’s remarks that military force used against Taiwan by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) could constitute a “survival-threatening situation” necessitating the involvement of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces. Rather than trying to reduce tensions, Beijing is looking to leverage the situation to its advantage in action and rhetoric. On Saturday last week, four armed China Coast Guard vessels sailed around the Japanese-controlled Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台), known to Japan as the Senkakus. On Friday, in what
RSS