If Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Wang Jin-pyng (王金平), the former legislative speaker, takes over as chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF), he will not be the blank slate that foundation Chairman Lin Join-sane (林中森) has been.
Wang does not brag about his accomplishments, but the private talks that he held with American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Chairman Raymond Burghardt eight years ago are a good measure of Wang’s suitability for the position.
Lin was former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) errand boy, and he handled some trivial issues of a technical nature.
He was a blank slate that Ma could fill with anything he wanted, and he never did anything that was not in line with Ma’s wishes, nor would there ever be any traces of concern for Taiwan or Taiwan’s interests.
Wang plays in another league altogether. The frequency with which he used to hold conversations and meetings with officials at the AIT gives just a little glimpse of his stature.
His comments have always been spot-on, he understands public opinion and has never been led by the nose by Ma or the KMT.
At the time of the Sunflower movement in 2014, Wang took a sympathetic attitude toward the students and their demands, which should not have been a surprise to anyone.
On March 16, 2009, he told Burghardt that former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) had appointed him to hold talks with China on the three direct links, financial management and investment and student exchanges.
According to Wang, the talks were concluded, but because Beijing was unwilling to allow the Chen administration to claim any kind of credit for rapprochement and the KMT was worried about Chen being allowed to do so for fear it would have had a negative impact on Ma’s presidential aspirations, the agreements were never signed.
Wang is of the opinion that it was the talks that he concluded with China that allowed the Ma administration to reach agreements with Beijing on these issues and to sign agreements so soon after Ma took office.
Wang complained that the Ma administration would not allow these agreements to go to the legislature for review, which resulted in the public feeling that it had no say in the matter.
This was also why Wang insisted on the necessity of submitting the cross-strait service trade agreement to the legislature for review.
Of course, Ma paid no attention to what Wang said, which he felt was grating on the ear. His only concern was to give Beijing a quick answer, and he was worried that the legislature would create problems and slow things down.
This was why the KMT tried to ram the service trade agreement through the legislature.
However, when then-KMT legislator Chang Ching-chung (張慶忠) took just 30 seconds to announce that the pact had cleared committee review, it was the spark that ignited the Sunflower student protests.
In a conversation on Feb. 18, 2009, Wang told then-AIT director Stephen Young that no one in the Chinese leadership would dare change the “one China” or the unification goal.
He therefore suggested that Ma should approach his administration’s cross-strait policy proposals by answering three questions: Will they harm Taiwan’s sovereignty, security or the interests of all Taiwanese?
If Wang gets lucky in his old age and is appointed chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation, hopefully he will remember these three questions.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath