On May 4, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman and New Taipei City Mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫) is scheduled to visit Beijing and meet with Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) General Secretary Xi Jinping (習近平).
This will undoubtedly be heralded as another step forward in the rapprochement between China and Taiwan.
While it is obviously a positive sign that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are meeting and talking, there are a number of underlying problems with this meeting.
First, Beijing does not view or treat Taiwan as an equal neighbor, but considers it a “lost territory” that needs to be recovered — by force if necessary.
Its current strategy toward Taiwan is to gradually envelop it by economic means, so in due time it can impose political unification.
Second, the meeting in Beijing is set to be a KMT-CCP party-to-party affair. It is clear that the KMT does not represent the full range of public opinion in Taiwan.
For long-term peace and stability between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait it is essential that there is a better consensus in Taiwan on the way forward in relations with China.
Third, Beijing has a habit of backing its diplomatic efforts with force in its relations with neighbors, as it has demonstrated in the South China Sea, East China Sea, Tibet and East Turkestan.
It has not shown itself to be acting as a “responsible stakeholder” in these incidences.
So, can we expect it to adhere to any promises and agreements it might make with Taiwan?
In view of these rather serious concerns, it would be good if Chu would impress the following points on Xi:
Taiwan is a free and democratic nation, and in a democracy one can expect there to be changes of administration. China needs to accept this, and pursue peace and stability between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, irrespective of the government that is elected in Taiwan.
Taiwanese want the nation to be accepted as a full and equal member in the international community.
If Beijing respects the wishes of Taiwanese it must cease its objections to Taiwan’s membership of international organizations such as the UN and the WHO.
Taiwanese do not want to live with the threat of more than 1,600 missiles aimed at their homeland.
It would be helpful, to say the least, if China would dismantle these missiles and end the threat of military force.
Chu could tell Xi that the failure of Beijing to move on these issues would increase tensions in the region, and would not be beneficial to peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.
An agreement on these three issues would constitute a real breakthrough and would provide the basis for a long-term framework for positive relations across the strait, as friends and neighbors.
Such an agreement — which could be called the “2015 consensus” — would be much more preferable than a perpetuation of the old and vague myth of the so-called “1992 consensus” — which is still being promoted in some quarters.
We need to move away from outdated concepts and move relations into the 21st century, laying the basis for a better future for both Taiwan and China.
Respect for Taiwan’s existence as a free and democratic nation would be an appropriate first step.
Mark Kao is president of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs, a Taiwanese-American grassroots organization based in Washington.
French firm DCI-DESCO in April won a bid to upgrade Taiwan’s Lafayette frigates, which has strained ties between China and France. In 1991, France sold Taiwan six Lafayette frigates and in 1992 sold it 60 Mirage 2000 fighter jets. To prevent arms sales between the nations, China negotiated an agreement with France and in 1994 in a joint statement, France promised that there would be no future arms sales to Taiwan. From China’s point of view, the DCI-DESCO deal constitutes a breach of the agreement, but the French stance is that it is not selling Taiwan new weapons, but instead providing a
Chung Yuan ChristiaN University is clearly in bed with the People’s Republic of China. This can be the only explanation why the school’s authorities have done their utmost to shield a student, who lodged a complaint against an associate professor, and then used thuggish tactics to compel the teacher to issue two separate apologies to China. The original complaint, filed by an unnamed Chinese student, was for remarks by associate professor Chao Ming-wei (招名威) during a class on the origin of COVID-19. A second complaint was filed by the same student after Chao, during an apology, stated that he was a
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) in her inaugural address on May 20 firmly said: “We will not accept the Beijing authorities’ use of ‘one country, two systems’ to downgrade Taiwan and undermine the cross-strait status quo.” The Chinese government was not too happy, and later that day, an opinion piece on the Web site of China’s state broadcaster China Central Television said: “While Tsai’s first inaugural address four years ago was read by Beijing as an ‘unfinished answer sheet,’ the one she presented this time was even more below-par.” Speaking to the China Review News Agency, Shanghai Institutes for International Studies vice president
During my twenty-two years in the US Senate, I became a student of Taiwan and its history. I was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asia, the Pacific and International Cybersecurity Policy, and have made at least 25 trips to Taiwan and have been invited as an observer to two of the nation’s presidential elections. Taiwan’s continuous economic miracle has seen the nation transition from a mixed agricultural-industrial society at the end of Japan’s 50 years of jurisdiction to today’s economic powerhouse, unmatched by most nations of the world. Just as outstanding has been Taiwan’s decades of resistance and