A lot has been made of Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu’s (陳菊) comments during her trip to China last week to promote this summer’s World Games after she used the words “President Ma [Ying-jeou, 馬英九]” and “central government” during a meeting with the mayor of Beijing.
Chen became the first high-profile Taiwanese official to make such comments on the record in China. Chen’s actions have received a lot of domestic media attention and earned her rare praise from politicians across the political spectrum.
Although her comments were censored by Chinese television, she succeeded in reminding people that it is possible to travel to China and meet senior Chinese officials while upholding Taiwan’s dignity.
Chen’s behavior is in stark contrast to that of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄), who during a meeting with Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) on Tuesday referred to the situation in Taiwan using the term daonei (島內), or “on the island.”
Wu could not find a suitable opportunity to mention “Taiwan,” let alone use words that hinted at Taiwan’s sovereign status. The excuse given by KMT officials afterwards was that Wu’s terminology was a product of his upbringing.
This just doesn’t wash.
But then again, Taiwanese should not expect less from Wu, who has often shown himself to be no champion of titles, regularly referring to the president as “Mr Ma.”
As well as highlighting the cowardice of top KMT officials such as Wu and former chairman Lien Chan (連戰), Chen’s trip was a reminder that, contrary to what the KMT would have us believe, it is possible to achieve positive results when dealing with China — and to do so with self-respect.
The blaze of propaganda surrounding Ma’s cross-strait “success” since the KMT returned to office has blurred the achievements during the eight years of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government from 2000 until last year. During that time, Taiwanese companies were allowed to invest billions of dollars in China, much more than had been allowed under previous KMT governments. But the government never felt it had to belittle Taiwan to achieve its goals.
It was the DPP that in 2001 initiated the “small three links” and later started cross-strait flights during holiday periods with a view to eventually upgrading them. It also completed negotiations on cross-strait charter flights.
The Chinese held off on implementing them for fear of giving the DPP government a propaganda coup. Instead, it waited to let the KMT earn all the glory after it regained power.
The DPP also made the first tentative steps toward opening the country to Chinese tourists, although it was skeptical about letting too many visit at a time, and with good reason.
The problem for the DPP was that it failed to properly publicize these achievements, allowing them to be drowned out by endless attacks from the opposition and the pro-unification media.
While relations between Taiwan and China were far from perfect during its tenure, the DPP at least demonstrated that it is not necessary to denigrate Taiwan to earn economic concessions from Beijing. If only so much could be said of the present government.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more
RSS