Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) has caused a stir with comments he made in Shanghai.
In a speech at the Taipei-Shanghai Forum opening ceremony on Monday, Ko said: “The two sides of the [Taiwan] Strait are one family” and should establish “a community of common destiny.”
The dispute between Taiwan and China is like a “quarrel between a married couple,” he said.
China’s Taiwan Affairs Office Minister Zhang Zhijun (張志軍) echoed Ko in a meeting with the mayor on the sidelines of the forum, saying: “We always think of the two sides of the Strait as one family, a community with a shared destiny.”
At a glance, word choices such as “family” and “community” make it seem as if the relationship between Taiwan and China has been smooth sailing — but has it?
Would one sabotage a family member by stealing their friends, as Beijing did last month when it seduced Panama into switching diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China?
Would one claim goodwill and at the same aim hundreds of missiles at someone they call “family?”
The relationship between Taiwan and China is one of enemies. Beijing makes no secret of its ambition to annex Taiwan and remove the Republic of China from the map. Until China renounces the use of force against Taiwan to achieve unification, no matter what rosy pictures Beijing paints and beautiful words pour from the mouths of Chinese officials, it is just sugar-coating for its drive for unification.
While the flowery phrases might have confused some as to whether China is a friend or foe, an increasing number of Taiwanese are beginning to see through Beijing’s hypocrisy with its moves to push Taiwan out of the international arena.
Whether Ko is among the increasing number of officials breaking away because of naivety remains to be seen.
Ko might have simply wished to extend goodwill and show that he harbors no hatred toward China. Attending forums that aim to promote peaceful cross-strait relations is to be encouraged if they expand Chinese appreciation of Taiwan’s democracy.
However, it is a different story when one party fails to show mutual respect and sincerity, but instead maintains a hidden political agenda.
By choosing to share a stage with Chinese officials when Taiwan’s sovereignty has been oppressed on the international stage, Ko is playing into the hands of Beijing’s “united front” propaganda and has become an actor in Beijing’s “one China” game, rationalizing its actions and giving the impression that Taiwan is part of China.
If Ko needed to touch upon cross-strait affairs, he could have seized the opportunity to ask about the whereabouts and well being of detained human rights campaigner Lee Ming-che (李明哲) and lodge a protest about Beijing’s latest bullying of Taiwan at the World Health Assembly.
His failure to do so was disappointing.
“Conducting united front tactics is their [Chinese officials’] duty and carrying out anti-united front tactics is our [Taiwanese officials’] duty,” Ko said yesterday.
If only Ko was as wise and vigilant as those words suggest.
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Former Fijian prime minister Mahendra Chaudhry spoke at the Yushan Forum in Taipei on Monday, saying that while global conflicts were causing economic strife in the world, Taiwan’s New Southbound Policy (NSP) serves as a stabilizing force in the Indo-Pacific region and offers strategic opportunities for small island nations such as Fiji, as well as support in the fields of public health, education, renewable energy and agricultural technology. Taiwan does not have official diplomatic relations with Fiji, but it is one of the small island nations covered by the NSP. Chaudhry said that Fiji, as a sovereign nation, should support
RSS