Last month, Taiwan’s decades-long diplomatic relationship with El Salvador came to an abrupt end. El Salvador understands the relationship between Taiwan’s status, China and the Republic of China (ROC) better than most countries.
Diplomatic relations were first established between the ROC and El Salvador in 1933, but at that time, Taiwan was not part of the ROC. In 1949, the ROC “government” occupied Taiwan, but had lost all its Chinese territory after losing the Chinese Civil War.
At the signing of the San Francisco Peace Treaty with Japan in 1951, El Salvador’s ambassador declared that his country accepted that Japan only relinquished its sovereignty over Taiwan and Penghu so that their sovereignty and political future could be wholly determined according to the principles of liberty and the free expression of its people.
The treaty has never been amended and is still a valid international agreement. Yet by establishing diplomatic relations with China and accepting Beijing’s “one China” principle, El Salvador has not only brushed aside Taiwan’s position as a democratic nation, it has also reneged on its promise and turned its back on democratic principles.
Taipei and Washington must issue the sternest possible response to El Savador’s pusillanimous betrayal.
On the surface, the government did issue a robust response by moving first to sever the diplomatic relationship and terminating all economic financial aid, but by emphasizing the 85-year-long diplomatic relationship between the two countries, the government simply exposed the fact that El Salvador broke off relations with the “ROC” rather than “Taiwan.”
Taiwan must build relationships with the international community by either rectifying the nation’s official name or clearly redefining the concept of the ROC.
Beijing’s latest overbearing suppression of Taiwan has elicited a rare reflex response from Washington.
A US Department of State spokesman said that the US was “deeply disappointed” by El Salvador’s decision, while a statement released by White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders spoke of the US’ “grave concern” over China’s “destabilization of the cross-strait relationship” and its “political interference in the western hemisphere.”
The statement also said that the Salvadorean government’s decision would result in a re-evaluation of the US’ relationship with El Salvador.
China’s poaching of El Salvador fits its pattern of hegemonic behavior and expansionism, encapsulated in its long-standing hunger to annex Taiwan. However, this time Beijing has thoroughly irritated Washington and prompted the US to draw a new diplomatic red line.
From Washington’s perspective, China’s aggressive behavior in Asia is one thing — and it has begun to push back against it — but if Beijing seeks to encroach upon the US’ sphere of influence in the western hemisphere, it will sow the seeds of its own destruction.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has sought to make hay over the government’s latest diplomatic setback, yet the real setback from this incident is to the bogus legal mandate of the ROC and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) regime.
Xi’s Belt and Road Initiative has been spurned by the US, while his country’s “peaceful rise” is being resisted both economically and militarily by the US.
Beijing’s purchase of El Salvador’s friendship could herald a turning point in Taiwan’s dealings with the outside world and the beginning of a genuine Taiwanese foreign diplomacy.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Edward Jones
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
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