Former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) has described the relationship between Taiwan and China as a “special international relationship” and former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has said that Taiwan and China are two separate nations — one on each side of the Taiwan Strait.
Premier William Lai (賴清德) burned the bridges by publicly backing Taiwanese independence. For Taiwan’s highest executive leader to announce that Taiwanese independence is his ultimate goal is a historical breakthrough for Taiwan. His vision, courage, honesty and straightforward attitude deserve praise.
During the Martial Law era, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) made supporting Taiwanese independence a capital crime. Many activists died trying to promote independence. Today, their stories still make people cry.
Polls show increased support for Taiwanese independence since the lifting of martial law, but the concept was long been frowned upon and the term has been almost exclusively used to discriminate against, insult and mock Taiwanese. Lai’s decision to openly embrace it has imbued it with a new sense of dignity and pride, and brought it into the political mainstream.
Pro-unification parties are both worried and pleased with Lai’s remarks: They fear the growing influence of independence supporters, but they are pleased with the possibility that China could issue a warrant for Lai’s arrest for violating China’s “Anti-Secession” Law, which they, absurdly, worship.
They thought China would react strongly to Lai’s remarks, but China’s Taiwan Affairs Office simply reiterated its “one China” cliches and moved on.
They then hoped that something would happen at the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) 19th National Congress, but in his three-hour-long address, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) barely said anything new about cross-strait relations and even added, quite considerately, that Beijing would “respect the current system and way of life” in Taiwan.
The pro-unification camp are of course very disappointed, which explains why they have been trying to exaggerate rumors that China could invade Taiwan in 2020 and occupy Taiwan’s outlying islands.
Today’s disputes over national territory cannot be simply resolved by violence, especially when an authoritarian country tries to invade a free and democratic country. For China, the problem that Taiwan presents is not so much a military problem as a political one, as it is related to how China is perceived in the world and whether the regime can continue to exist.
If China invaded Taiwan, Japan and the US would definitely intervene. The EU would also impose economic sanctions on China. So far, the CCP has managed to justify its rule by ensuring that China’s economy and living standards continue to improve. If the economy stops growing and if the standard of living were to deteriorate, the party would lose its legitimacy.
Xi knows that he must deal with Taiwan with extreme caution because, although China’s military leaders call for attacking Taiwan, they might not be ready to stake their lives on an invasion, as most of them live a comfortable life as successful businesspeople or corrupt officials. Xi surely knows that invading Taiwan would mean the end of his political career.
As China’s security policies become increasingly similar to North Korea’s, Taiwan must continue to uphold the values of democracy and freedom and make them an essential part of its culture and political system, thereby clearly distinguishing itself from China. The more obvious that is, the more likely that Taiwan will receive support from the international community.
Peng Ming-min is a former presidential adviser.
Translated by Tu Yu-an
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
Swiftly following the conclusion of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) China trip, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office unveiled 10 new policy measures for Taiwan. The measures, covering youth exchanges, agricultural and fishery imports, resumption of certain flights and cultural and media cooperation, appear to offer “incentives” for cross-strait engagement. However, viewed within the political context, their significance lies not in promoting exchanges but in redefining who is qualified to represent Taiwan in dialogue with China. First, the policy statement proposes a “normalized communication mechanism” between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This would shift cross-strait interaction from
RSS