On May 24, following a series of Chinese attacks aimed at restricting Taiwan’s sovereignty, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said: “China’s overbearing actions are challenging Taiwan’s bottom line, and we will no longer tolerate that.”
The statement had several repercussions — most directly in the Legislative Yuan, whose Foreign and National Defense Committee summoned the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), the National Security Bureau and the Overseas Community Affairs Council to report on strategies in response to Tsai’s statement.
The ministry and committees expressed their opinions about how to put an end to concessions.
The severest countermeasure was expressed by the MAC, which said it would more strictly review applications from Chinese government officials and other Chinese desiring to visit Taiwan.
Similar countermeasures will serve as an important indicator as Beijing evaluates Taipei’s determination and as a reference as it decides whether to dial down its oppression of Taiwan.
When Taiwan is bullied, it must take precautions to maintain its national character.
This is the mainstream opinion as confirmed by a recent opinion poll: More than 63 percent of respondents said the government must take countermeasures, making it clear that when things reach an extreme, the government must push back, as China’s military intimidation and diplomatic blockade against Taiwan has aroused a wave of anti-China sentiment.
Making decisions against this backdrop, the Tsai administration must follow up with action, both as a survival strategy and because of the realities of governance.
The question is: Considering the wide disparity between Taiwan and China, what kind of a counterattack would be appropriate and effective enough to make China understand that if it presses on, it will meet with pushback — while at the same time, being unable to attack?
Perhaps the failure of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) China policy could provide guidance.
The direction during his administration can be summed up as: a cross-strait relationship focused on Taiwanese businesspeople and lacking in democracy, freedom and human rights.
The benefits from cross-strait exchanges during the period were only partial, as all Taiwanese, in addition to the businesspeople, had to absorb the cost of cross-strait exchanges, which also brought no benefits to Chinese.
The reason for this is simple. As former Chinese Communist Party (CCP) general secretary Zhao Ziyang (趙紫陽) said long ago: If there is no democracy following China’s economic development, there will inevitably be corruption.
China is fighting corruption at every level, but it still fails to keep up. It is a systemic, not moral, problem. This is why it is said that democracy is Chinese’s hope and the CCP’s fear.
This gives the government a lot of space to work on — there is no need for loud verbal attacks. Action is key and it is what counts.
For example, it might be better to adopt friendlier policies toward Chinese rights advocates and give them the opportunity to play a preventive anti-communist role.
In addition, Taiwan can lend its firm support to issues concerning China’s democracy and establish itself as a democratic bastion on the international stage.
From a democratic perspective, China has isolated itself. Taiwanese should be confident that intelligent people in the government will have the creativity and courage to add substance to Tsai’s statement and find ways to use that as leverage.
Tzou Jiing-wen is the editor-in-chief of the Liberty Times (the sister newspaper of the Taipei Times).
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.