One burning question on everyone’s mind this week is why former vice president Lien Chan (連戰) insisted on going to China to attend a series of events — including a military parade — hosted by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to mark the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II.
Lien’s China visit has prompted politicians from both sides of the political divide to speak with one voice, deeming the trip inappropriate and urging Lien to cancel his plans.
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Tuan Yi-kang (段宜康) attempted to put a light spin on the matter by phrasing his query as a multiple-choice question, with choices ranging from “A) because Lien is a military buff” to “B) because Lien is the National Security Bureau’s most-seasoned secret agent” and “C) because of the Lien family’s investments in China.” Meanwhile, former National Development Council minister Kuan Chung-ming (管中閔) was more direct, responding to Lien’s insistence on attending China’s military parade with “Spectate my ass.”
Indeed, many wonder about Lien’s insistence on attending, particularly at a time when it is expected to have a negative impact on the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) already bleak electoral outlook in the run-up to next January’s presidential and legislative elections.
Some have speculated that Lien, who no longer enjoys the political limelight in Taiwan, is seeking to find that limelight in China; others attribute it to the success of China’s “united front” (統戰) tactics, knowing how President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) might have been stamping his feet, yearning to be in Lien’s shoes to have a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平).
It is interesting to note that the reasons cited by both the Presidential Office and the KMT as they urged Lien to reconsider his China trip have largely focused on the differences in the historical accounts between the CCP and the Republic of China (ROC) government, saying Lien has “deviated from historical facts” by giving credit to communist forces for resisting Japanese aggression during the Second Sino- Japanese War from 1937 to 1945.
History is certainly important, but Lien is not the first retired Taiwanese official to attend this sort of celebration in China. When China marked the 60th anniversary of the victory, it also invited some pro-China groups from Taiwan to support its claim over the nation.
The main issue that is upsetting the public is Lien’s attendance at the military parade, which China touts as the highlight of its festivities.
Lien says his trip is for cross-strait peace, but how does watching a military parade promote peace?
Does Lien not know that the various weaponry to be paraded includes ones with which China is prepared to attack Taiwan?
Staging a military parade usually serves two basic purposes for a nation: To show off to other countries its advanced weaponry and military strength, and to raise military morale and underline its determination to defend its interests to its domestic audience.
Maybe politicians from both the pan-green and the pan-blue camps have all mistaken Lien and underestimated his courage and wisdom. Maybe when observing the Dong Feng-16 (DF-16) ballistic missiles — which strike at a range of between 800km and 1,000km and some of which target Taiwan — Lien will take the opportunity to demand that Xi remove the missiles aimed at Taiwan.
Indeed, the public is still hopeful that Lien, having once served as vice president and who is now the honorary chairman of the KMT, will demonstrate a level of class befitting his status and standing.
Or is that too much to ask?
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