Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was invited to speak at the World Chinese Economic Summit in Malaysia this month. Organizers not only gave him the honorific “His Excellency,” they also changed the title of his speech from Closer economic ties between Taiwan and ASEAN to The role of technology and culture for overseas Chinese in the world economy. Angered by what he saw as attempts to belittle him, Ma wrote his own name card — reading “former Taiwanese president Ma” — and complained about the pressure Beijing was exerting upon him, asking where China’s goodwill had gone.
Ma was the most pro-China president Taiwan has ever had. He was careful during his two terms in office not to say anything to provoke Beijing, made sure he mentioned the so-called “1992 consensus” and followed China’s lead with the “diplomatic truce” policy. Even after leaving office, he found it impossible to escape Beijing’s suppression.
In the past eight years, Beijing allowed economic, cultural and academic cross-strait exchanges, albeit under the auspices of the “one China” principle. When Ma met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the two men avoided using their official titles, took care to call each other “Mr,” and when Ma mentioned “one China, different interpretations” in a post-meeting news conference, Chinese officials did not object. He was indulged in being able to retain the “different interpretations” reference, but this indulgence seems to have been taken away now that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) is at the party’s helm: The new party platform mentions only the “1992 consensus.”
Ma has always emphasized “different interpretations,” although Beijing did not recognize it. Now Beijing is applying pressure on Ma, because Taiwan is reluctant to accept “one China.”
When President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration refused to accept Beijing’s cross-strait policy, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) started applying pressure, and it is not just directed at Ma. China has sharply reduced the number of Chinese tourists to Taiwan, restricted trade and economic exchanges, and reduced the number of Chinese students allowed to study in Taiwan. The list keeps getting longer.
The CCP knows it does not control Taiwan, but hopes the two sides of the Taiwan Strait will come closer through economic, cultural and other types of exchanges in the long term, and eventually usher in unification.
“Different interpretations” is an indulgence, not CCP policy, so it is allowed as a kind of strategic obfuscation. As far as the CCP is concerned, so long as Taiwan recognizes the “one China” principle, it is willing to look the other way. However, if Taiwan fails to recognize “one China,” then there is little hope of unification, and in that scenario Beijing is reluctant to accept the “one China, different interpretations” proposal.
It is probably unwise to read too much into Xi’s meeting with James Soong (宋楚瑜), Taiwan’s envoy to the APEC summit in Lima, Peru.
There is no obvious answer to the deadlock in cross-strait relations. The situation has to be scrutinized before a new, mutually acceptable narrative for cross-strait relations can be found.
Ma misinterpreted China’s attitude when he was in office, and his embarrassment at an international forum is of little consequence.
Tsai is president now and she has little room for error. She needs to listen to Taiwanese, watch everything Beijing says and does, and proceed with caution in her dealings with Beijing.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) said on Monday that it would be announcing its mayoral nominees for New Taipei City, Yilan County and Chiayi City on March 11, after which it would begin talks with the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) to field joint opposition candidates. The KMT would likely support Deputy Taipei Mayor Lee Shu-chuan (李四川) as its candidate for New Taipei City. The TPP is fielding its chairman, Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), for New Taipei City mayor, after Huang had officially announced his candidacy in December last year. Speaking in a radio program, Huang was asked whether he would join Lee’s
RSS