China’s use of soft power against Taiwan has apparently borne some fruit as a survey on Sunday suggested that Taiwanese’s impression of China has become more positive over the past year.
Poll results released by the Taiwanese Public Opinion Foundation showed that, compared with a similar survey conducted last year, the percentage of respondents with a favorable impression of China rose from 44.4 percent to 48.8 percent, while the percentage of those with a negative impression fell from 47.4 percent to 43.9 percent.
National Taiwan Normal University’s Department of Taiwan Culture, Languages and Literature associate professor Chuang Chia-yin (莊佳穎) attributed the result to China’s popular culture and entertainment shows, which more Taiwanese are being exposed to.
While the survey results are open to interpretation, one thing is certain: When it comes to the entertainment and commercial sides of cultural power, Taiwan is indeed losing its edge to China.
A number of local TV channels run China-produced programs around the clock, particularly period drama series, which wow Taiwanese viewers with their lavish sets and costumes, and singing and game shows, which present a lineup of A-list artists and elaborate stage productions for viewers.
The low-budget sets and obscure guests on many local programs pale by comparison, so it is not surprising that Chinese programs have helped shift Taiwanese’s perception of China in a positive direction.
Beijing has played a role in this. Money is difficult to resist, as can be seen from how few big-name celebrities have participated in New Year’s Eve countdown shows in Taiwan in the past few years. Chinese stars, and an increasing number of Taiwanese A-list actors, accept invitations to similar events in China.
Taiwan’s entertainment sector is not defenseless against the temptation of China’s wealth. Taiwan still has the advantage of freedom of expression, as well as the creativity, dynamic diversity and vitality that a democratic society has to offer.
However, that alone is not enough for the nation’s entertainment sector to thrive. More resources and attention are needed from the government so that a friendly environment can be created to showcase the nation’s distinct culture to the world.
To be fair, there is nothing wrong with Taiwanese TV stations broadcasting China-produced shows, as it allows Taiwanese viewers to recognize the differences between the Taiwanese and Chinese cultures. It also broadens the horizons of entertainers, allowing them to examine their own shortcomings.
Taiwanese cannot deny that Chinese culture has had an effect on Taiwan, or that Taiwanese culture has roots in China. However, Taiwan has built a unique culture of its own and the government should do a better job of shaping policies so that entertainers and artists have a stage on which to shine. Taiwan should consider its own soft power, letting its culture affect the world.
Beijing in February launched numerous incentives for Taiwanese to go to China, with offers aimed to woo those in the high-tech, agriculture, education, and culture and entertainment sectors, and especially targeting professionals, educators, artists and entertainers.
That Beijing is drawing up incentives and dumping capital to lure Taiwanese to the other side of the Taiwan Strait suggests that Taiwan has no shortage of talent. The crux of the matter is not the effects or threats posed by Chinese big money, but the lax attitude with which the Taiwanese government addresses culture and entertainment — is the government’s inaction driving talent out of the nation?
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