As all are aware by now, United States policy toward Taiwan is guided by three canonical texts: the Taiwan Relations Act, the Three Joint Communiques, and the Six Assurances. But the State Department now seems to be working with a fourth document which goes by the bland name of “state telegram number 87604” of June 26, 2007, regarding “UN references to Taiwan.” Long dormant, “07 State 87604” seems to have been rediscovered at State Department headquarters in Foggy Bottom. I doubt it will ever be enshrined with the three holy texts, but it now seems to influence American diplomacy toward Taiwan more than ever before. I expected some sign of “07 State 87604’s” presence over the past month at the Southeast Asian summits, but saw little. It wasn’t apparent at the mid-November Biden-Xi (習近平) summit at the G20 leaders’ meeting in Bali, Indonesia, although there was something else new; Chinese Communist leaders have begun to declare that Taiwan is not simply “a” core interest but, in fact, that “the Taiwan Question is the core of China’s core interests” (台灣問題是中國核心利益中的核心), the reddest of red lines. Over the past decade or so, Washington has become inured to Beijing’s hyperbole over Taiwan. And as such, it is hard to tell what China’s “core interests” really are. Indeed, in December 2022, one can see that “Taiwan” cannot possibly be China’s “hardest-core of core-interests.” No, that title must instead, go to “Covid-19.” Otherwise, China’s leadership wouldn’t be sacrificing trillions and trillions of yuan to keep Covid-19 deaths at 3.0 per 1.4 billion people over six months. Yes, that’s right. The news last month was that there were three Covid-19 fatalities in China from May through October 2022 and a total of 595 deaths year-to-date. And those three unfortunate patients were all over 87 years old. Nonetheless, I was
Anger has spread in Xinjiang’s capital, Urumqi, where protesters blame China’s strict “zero COVID” policy for a deadly blaze that ripped through a residential building, killing 10 people and injuring nine. The residents claim that the pandemic restrictions hampered rescue attempts and prevented people escaping from their apartments. Throngs of residents in Urumqi have taken to the streets, triggering a wave of protests across China. Students and residents rallied in Shanghai and Beijing, chanting “Down with [Chinese President] Xi Jinping (習近平),” “Chinese Communist Party (CCP) step down” and “We want freedom and democracy.” This marks one of the rare occasions where protesters have dared to openly call for Xi’s removal. Those who have been keeping close tabs on the development of China’s political scene are watching warily how things are unfolding. Even though China is viewing Taiwan as a wolf views its prey, the wolf’s cold aggression pales in comparison to the CCP’s ruthlessness. Chinese and Taiwanese students who have studied abroad should encourage other Chinese and Taiwanese students studying overseas to rise and join the “white paper” protests through other means, as college students can play an essential role in a critical moment like this. If the activists can gain a voice and become powerful over the next few weeks, they could inspire other college students and people from other countries to support their cause, which would bring them closer to toppling Xi’s duplicitous regime. The CCP has relied on trying to brainwash the proletariat for the past 73 years, but it is now unmasked by a harsh reality. Smart people have questioned why they are still living under strict lockdowns while the rest of the world is free to watch the FIFA World Cup in Qatar without wearing masks. Professors, political rivals, military personnel and party members who have been oppressed
EDITORIAL CARTOON
In every conflict over the living world, something is being protected, and most of the time, it is the wrong thing. The world’s most destructive industries are fiercely protected by governments. The three sectors that appear to be most responsible for the collapse of ecosystems and erasure of wildlife are fossil fuels, fisheries and farming. Last year, governments directly subsidized oil and gas production to the tune of US$64 billion, and spent a further US$531 billion on keeping fossil fuel prices low. The latest figures for fisheries, from 2018, show that global subsidies for the sector amount to US$35 billion a year, more than 80 percent of which goes to large-scale industrial fishing. Most are paid to “enhance capacity” — in other words to help the industry, as marine ecosystems collapse, catch more fish. Every year, governments spend US$500 billion on farm subsidies, the great majority of which pay no regard to environmental protection. Even the payments that claim to do so often inflict more harm than good. For example, many of the EU’s pillar two “green” subsidies sustain livestock farming on land that would be better used for ecological restoration. More than half the European farm budget is spent on propping up animal farming, which is arguably the world’s most ecologically destructive industry. Pasture-fed meat production destroys five times as much forest as palm oil does. It now threatens some of the richest habitats on Earth, among which are forests in Madagascar, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, Colombia, Brazil, Mexico, Australia and Myanmar. Meat production could swallow 3 million square kilometers of the world’s most biodiverse places in 35 years. That is almost the size of India. In Australia, 94 percent of the deforestation in the catchment area of the Great Barrier Reef — a major cause of coral
In the more dangerous and unpredictable multipolar world in which we now live, trade relations remain of seminal importance, but they cannot be separated from geopolitics. Many Europeans long believed that they could be, but Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has highlighted the risks raised by the EU’s dependence on Russian gas and shown that this approach is no longer tenable. If the EU wants to be recognized as a true geopolitical actor, reinforcing its internal unity is not be enough. It must also recalibrate its strategic compass, using its political and economic instruments more coherently and identifying not only risks, but also opportunities, more effectively. This is why I have argued from the beginning of my mandate as high representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy that Europe must deepen its ties with the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean. To make the qualitative leap needed, Europe must bolster political dialogue at the highest level. However, to ensure that its efforts are credible, it must also complete the modernization of existing association agreements with Mexico and Chile, sign the negotiated post-Cotonou agreement with the African, Caribbean and Pacific community, ratify the association agreement with Central American countries and finalize the EU-Mercosur agreement. While trade plays an important role in all these agreements, none can be viewed as just a trade deal. The most complex of these agreements is the one with Mercosur, formally known as the Southern Common Market, which has been under negotiation more than two decades. The tango might say that 20 years is nothing, but in this case, it is too long. On a visit to South America last month, I had the opportunity to meet with leaders from Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay, which holds Mercosur’s rotating presidency. More recently, I congratulated Brazilian president-elect
China appears to be easing some COVID-19 restrictions after a week of rare mass protests in several major cities across the country, sparked by increasing public frustration with its longstanding and authoritarian “zero COVID” measures. The world is watching to see how and when it puts an end to its dead-end policy. The protests began with streets packed with crowds calling for an end to a months-long lockdown in Xinjiang’s capital, Urumqi, on Sunday last week, after 10 people were killed in a deadly fire in a building whose locked doors likely prevented escape and rescue efforts. More protests sprang up in Beijing, Shanghai, Chengdu, Xian and Wuhan. Students led calls for an end to repeated lockdowns, frequent quarantines and mass testing, while holding blank sheets of paper as a symbol of the government’s tight censorship. Many even called for a change in the political system. China nearly three years ago was swift in imposing draconian measures to control the initial outbreak in Wuhan. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has touted a strict “zero COVID” policy as a success of Chinese governance that saved lives while other countries dealt with high infection rates, hospitalizations and deaths. However, medical practitioners the world over were able to better treat the disease as more knowledge emerged. Vaccines and antiviral drugs were developed, and the emergence of the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 made the disease milder. These developments allowed countries to lift the strictest measures and return to a mostly normal life. However, China has stuck to its draconian policy, with increasingly unbearable social and economic costs. Many public health experts agree that China should end its policy, as it is simply impossible to stop every single case of the highly transmissible Omicron variant. The interminable lockdowns are damaging people’s livelihoods and mental health. However, as the virus has
Time waits for nobody and President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has only 18 months of her final term in office remaining. Will the drubbing in the local elections on Nov. 26 leave Tsai a lame duck for the rest of her presidency? Will the opposition parties use their newfound influence to impede the governing party’s policy agenda? Will the tunes sung by the central and local governments become louder and more dissonant? The nation will soon find out. Time is not on Tsai’s side. She is not going to be able to embark upon any major new policies, and it is about time to start thinking about writing a performance review for her time in the Presidential Office. Her much-touted judicial reform — the reason that voters gave the Democratic Progressive Party a majority and the presidency, and which she proclaimed with such vigor and to much applause in her inaugural address in 2016 — will be a major factor in this review. The electorate, if not profoundly unimpressed, is at least frustrated with her performance in this regard. First, did the voters ask for her half-baked “citizen judge” system — which is to be implemented on Jan. 1 and will only involve major criminal cases — or would they have preferred a jury system to hear civil and criminal cases, as has been long practiced in the US and the UK? Will the design of the system Tsai promoted, in which six lay judges will confer with three professional judges to reach a verdict, prevent professional judges from controlling the outcomes? Second, did they want a system in which judges and prosecutors have lifetime appointments? If there is one thing that is certain in politics, it is that absolute power corrupts absolutely. The principle can equally be applied to judges and prosecutors given lifetime appointments, especially for
Over the past few decades, only judges have been the triers of fact and law in Taiwan’s judiciary. Nevertheless, ordinary people are from next year to have the opportunity to be take on that role in criminal cases, a milestone in Taiwan’s history. The Citizen Judges Act (國民法官法) was passed by the Legislative Yuan on July 22, promulgated by the president on Aug. 12 and is to be implemented on Jan. 1 next year. Under the act, lay people are to be randomly selected as citizen judges who would participate in trial proceedings and adjudicate cases alongside professional judges in certain felony cases. The purpose of the citizen judge system is to enhance the transparency of the judiciary, account for the public’s opinion toward the law, promote public confidence in the judiciary, provide the public with a better understanding of the judiciary and honor the ideal of popular sovereignty. To accommodate a variety of living experiences and values from all walks of life, enrich professional judges’ perspectives of handling cases, allow the public to understand the judicial mechanism and enhance interaction between lay people and legal professionals, panels of three professional judges and six citizen judges are to be formed and entrusted with handling specific criminal cases. Professional judges and citizen judges are to work as teams, including hearing and deliberating cases, as well as delivering judgements. Taiwan is a civil law jurisdiction, as opposed to common law jurisdictions that hold jury trials. The citizen judge system is based on Japan’s saiban-in system, which also resembles a lay judge system. The primary objective of Taiwan’s citizen participation is to open a dialogue between judges and ordinary people in the interest of boosting judicial transparency and enhancing public confidence in the judiciary. Therefore, professional judges and citizen judges will be encouraged
In China, the “Blank Paper Movement” or the “A4 Revolution” is opposing the Chinese government’s COVID-19 policies, including endless testing for the virus and lockdowns. Some participants have called for Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) resignation, and because of this, some people have predicted that a situation similar to the Tiananmen Square Massacre might happen. Others even suggested that Xi might attack Taiwan to divert attention if the movement keeps growing. These scenarios are imaginative, but mostly improbable. Compared with Hong Kong’s 2019 anti-extradition protests, which drew 2 million participants, the unorganized “Blank Paper Movement” still has a long way to go. That it is happening in mainland China — rather than in a quasi-foreign territory like Hong Kong — allows the Chinese government to suppress it with ease. Taiwanese must understand that if Taiwan were to be ruled by China, any opposition would be crushed. Taiwanese have to defend the nation’s safety, freedom of speech and democracy. This is a mission that they must undertake. They have to take the responsibility for the next generations. The US Department of Defense has released its Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2022 report, which addresses a hypothetical Chinese invasion of Taiwan. The report said that China lacks the capacity to carry out “an amphibious invasion of Taiwan,” but it would be capable of taking over Itu Aba Island (Taiping Island, 太平島), Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島) and the islands of Kinmen and Lienchiang counties. Reports from the US Department of Defense have made the same points over the past 15 years. The two sides of the Taiwan Strait have maintained a military balance for years. Many Taiwanese are fearful of provoking China when reports say an invasion might occur soon. Taiwanese should resist China and defend Taiwan, but some “local collaborators” have criticized such
EDITORIAL CARTOON
Biogen Inc and Eisai Co caused a stir in September when they announced positive results in a late-stage trial for a closely watched Alzheimer’s drug, lecanemab. Doctors tempered their excitement, though, until they could scrutinize the full peer-reviewed data. That data arrived on Tuesday. While it is stoking enthusiasm that physicians might soon be able to offer patients a treatment that can slow the progression of the devastating disease, doctors need to carefully balance that optimism with safety concerns and the reality that the drug is far from a cure — and in fact, it is hard to quantify how meaningful it might be for a given patient. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) appears likely to approve lecanemab early next year, capping a decades-long slog to get a drug that works, albeit modestly, by addressing one of the underlying causes of Alzheimer’s. Now comes the next slog: getting answers on still critical unknowns about the drug. How much can this drug meaningfully change the day-to-day lives of patients and their caregivers? Does the benefit outweigh the small risk of its more serious side effects when it is being used in the real world? Would that benefit be enough to justify the cost of what is likely to be an expensive therapy? “Will it slow [the disease] down? Yes. Will it slow it down by an amount that probably matters to an average patient or family? Yeah, I think so,” said Randall Bateman, the Charles F. and Joanne Knight distinguished professor of neurology at the Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis. “But it’s not a massive thing. It’s a modest thing. It’s important to frame it that way,” he added. Bateman is a principal investigator in a trial exploring the combination of lecanemab with a drug that targets tau proteins, which clump
The strategically vital city of Kherson is back in the hands of Ukrainians, albeit under threat of Russian shelling and attacks on its electricity supply. However, as combatants on both sides of an increasingly static firing line prepare for a winter war, there are effectively two separate conflicts emerging — one on the land, the other in the air. What can the West do to help Ukraine meet the immediate tactical challenges, and ultimately seize the longer-term advantage? On land, the arrival of a wet, rainy fall and a harsh winter should lead to a decrease in operations. Both Russia and Ukraine need to rest and reinforce their troops, as well as repair equipment. A return to full-blown combat operations is not likely until late winter when the ground freezes, presenting a better opportunity for the heaviest equipment. Russia faces a struggle to fill the holes in its forward combat operations, thanks to low motivation and a failing draft. As up to 300,000 young men — under threat of conscription — have departed Russia for sanctuary in bordering nations, Russian President Vladimir Putin has resorted to conscripting criminals, the homeless and drunks rounded up in bars. Ukraine faces challenges too, but not of motivation. Its citizens, fighting an existential war, are mighty motivated. The Ukrainian challenge stems from having a far smaller population — only about a third of Russia’s. Ukraine could have a major advantage in supplies. The West is likely to continue providing not only the high-tech weapons that receive most of the publicity but also the bread and butter of infantry operations: guns, mortars, ammunition, fuel, trucks, night-vision devices, cold weather gear, portable stoves and point-to-point communications equipment. In contrast, Russian conscripts have been told to find their own sleeping bags and improvise bandages from tampons. However, the challenge in the land
North Korea has not said whether she has any siblings. Her age remains a mystery. The world does not even know her name. The important thing is that she is the “most beloved” daughter of Kim Jong-un. The young girl, who South Korean authorities believe is named Ju-ae and about nine years old, has suddenly been featured in North Korean state media alongside her all-powerful father. She most recently accompanied Kim on a photo op to celebrate the successful launch of the country’s most powerful ballistic missile — prompting “stormy cheers of ‘Hurrah!’” according to a Korean Central News Agency dispatch. Despite all the mystery, the events sent clear signals to the North Korean public and the wider world: First, the Kim regime is here to stay; second, the ruling family will not be bargaining away its nuclear arsenal any time soon. Both points were driven home when Kim brought his daughter along to observe the launch a new intercontinental ballistic missile believed capable of carrying multiple nuclear warheads to anywhere on the US mainland. Photos released by state media included a shot of Kim looking down on his child with the rocket looming behind them. The debut was remarkable on several levels. While parading heirs before the public has been a feature of hereditary monarchies the world over, the Kim family has been far more reluctant to reveal potential successors during its almost 75 years in power. Kim Jong-un did not make his official debut until he was about 26. Before Ju-ae’s first appearance in state media on Nov. 19, North Korea had not even acknowledged Kim had children. It is still not known whether the regime views his “precious child” as Kim’s heir, or whether that status would belong to the older brother she is rumored to have. “The optics of Kim and
In his first major foreign policy speech since taking office, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak on Monday said China represented a “systemic challenge to our values and interests,” but fell short of classifying China as a “threat.” Sunak was critical of China’s crackdown on protests over its strict COVID-19 policy, including its arrest and alleged assault of a BBC journalist covering the protests in Shanghai, and said the challenge presented by China “grows more acute as it moves towards even greater authoritarianism,” The Guardian reported on Monday. However, British lawmaker and former Conservative Party leader Iain Duncan Smith — who has been vocal in his criticisms of the Chinese government, and has been sanctioned by China for doing so — said Sunak should take more concrete action. “China has demonstrated an endless litany of bad behavior posing a threat to us/our allies. How is it yesterday the PM, who’d previously said China was a systemic threat, has now moved to systemic challenge,” he wrote on Twitter on Tuesday. “Our approach of ‘robustly pragmatic’ won’t worry the Chinese Govt one bit,” he added. The UK’s relationship with China has been worsening over the past several years, and Taipei should seize upon the opportunity to work more closely with the British government on countering the threat of Chinese authoritarianism. The arrest of the BBC journalist was preceded by Chinese Communist Party (CCP) actions taken on British soil. Spanish civil rights group Safeguard Defenders revealed last month that China has been running “overseas police service stations” in several countries — including in the UK — that work to intimidate Chinese living in those countries into being supportive of the CCP and returning to China. Chinese Consul-General in Manchester Zheng Xiyuan (鄭曦原) in October allegedly dragged a Hong Kong protester onto consulate grounds and violently assaulted the man. British Labour Party
Democracies are at their most powerful when they stand together. Both Taiwan and the UK are strong and healthy democracies that have much to learn from each other. The benefits of democracy and democratic values are clear. Taiwan’s track record of peace, stability and liberty demonstrates the intrinsic value of democracy. I have no doubt that the relationship between the UK and Taiwan will continue to flourish as they stand united by our shared values and commitment to peace. I have had the pleasure over the past few days of leading a delegation from the British House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee to Taiwan to meet its government and legislature to show our firm commitment to deepening engagement between our peoples. Visiting Taiwan has always been a priority for our committee. We wanted to learn more about Taiwan — its people, its government, its way of life and, yes, its great food! Cooperation between the UK and Taiwan has increased in recent years, but still has great potential to broaden and deepen. Two-way trade between Taiwan and the UK last year reached NT$224 billion (US$7.32 billion). However, there is tremendous potential for expanding trade further between Taiwan and the UK. Recent trade talks have included bilateral collaboration on renewable energy, technology and tackling barriers to trade in pharmaceuticals, whiskey, financial technology and food. There is also scope for expansion in the services trade, especially in the field of culture and education. In October last year, the British Council in Taiwan and the Ministry of Education signed a memorandum of understanding to support Taiwan’s ambition to become bilingual in Mandarin and English by 2030, and to promote increased collaboration in education, including cultivating Chinese language proficiency in the UK. Already each year, up to 8,000 Taiwanese students go to the UK to study. This
US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley recently suggested that Ukraine should start peace negotiations with Russia. The Ukrainian government expressed reluctance to do so. One way the US could promote eventual talks is to draw from its experience protecting Taiwan. Imagine it is November next year, and Ukraine has recovered most, but not all, the territories Russia seized in 2014 and this year. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy might fear that Russian President Vladimir Putin thinks the war has been profitable. He might worry that, after signing a peace treaty, Russia would rebuild and attack Ukraine again. Zelenskiy would need international support, but what if the West had grown tired of the matter? For Zelenskiy, the best solution is Ukraine’s admission to NATO. However, Ukraine would not garner the necessary support for admission from all NATO partners. This is where the Taiwan precedent could come into play. In 1979, the US simultaneously ended diplomatic relations with the Republic of China, and inaugurated such ties with the People’s Republic of China (PRC). However, the US did not abandon Taiwan. In April 1979, the US Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). In it are two basic security commitments. First, the US would “make available to Taiwan such defense articles and defense services in such quantity as to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability.” Second, the US would “maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan.” PRC leaders must be under no illusion about the first provision — Taiwan, if the need arises, would have advanced US weapons. The second provision is less transparent. Still, PRC leaders probably ask why the US would legally maintain the
The carnival of the elections went on for months leading up to voting on Saturday last week and, as expected, Taiwanese in nation’s north and west were much more immersed in it than those in the south and east. As a resident of Taipei, which has all of the resources and access typical of a capital, I have no complaints about the completeness of basic infrastructure. I pay attention to living conditions, such as social welfare, public security and traffic. However, I do wonder about voters in Hualien and Taitung counties and what they expected of their candidates. In addition to promoting agricultural produce and tourism, and perhaps granting some subsidies, what else did their candidates promise on the campaign trail? In western Taiwan, a comprehensive transportation system has contributed greatly to industrial development. Over the past two decades, traffic arteries have been enhanced with the establishment of the High Speed Rail system, more freeways and expressways and, most recently, the opening of the Taipei Metro’s Circular (Yellow) Line. Taiwan’s back garden of Hualien and Taitung has a different landscape. For urbanites, eastern Taiwan is known for its serenity, but I cannot help thinking about the area’s lack of transportation. The plains of the East Rift Valley would certainly allow for more roads and transport corridors. Provincial Highway No. 9, for example, spans more than 200km. Geography is not a reason to not construct there. Residents of Hualien and Taitung are like second-class citizens, waiting for infrastructure and transportation systems to be put in place. They should not be exploited any longer. Heaven only knows why they put up with their mayors and commissioners and their banal policies and poor planning. A politician’s vision reveals their depth. Even a post-dated check is worth issuing. Residents of Hualien and Taitung deserve to be treated seriously by all politicians
EDITORIAL CARTOON
Japan’s video game world was rocked recently by news that Yuji Naka, one of the creators of the iconic Sonic the Hedgehog series, was arrested on allegations of insider trading. The potential downfall of a storied 1990s name might have more symbolic meaning: Just as shocking for some in the industry will have been a commentary in China’s People’s Daily the same week, calling on the country to strengthen its strategic planning in the video game sector. The medium can play an important role “promoting Chinese culture” and enhancing the country’s influence in the world, it said. Japan should take that as a warning: China is rightly envious of its smaller neighbor’s soft power. Despite a significant language barrier, Japan punches well above its weight in pop-culture sectors such as video gaming and animation — something that has proved to be an important tool for winning friends and maintaining international status as its economic might has declined. Like with many other industries, that is another one China would like to dominate. It is no longer such an outlandish goal. Consider the likes of Genshin Impact, a fantasy role-playing game that looks and feels so Japanese it triggered protests from some corners when it was first announced. Yet it was conceived and developed in China, claimed the Best Mobile Game award at a prestigious industry event and generated US$1.3 billion in revenue last year. That is considerably more than any Japanese mobile game makes. Of the eight mobile properties that grossed more than US$1 billion last year, none are Japanese (Pokemon Go uses a Japanese IP but is made by the San Francisco-based Niantic). Despite initial skepticism, Genshin Impact has also become a hit in Japan. China is not the only place looking to use gaming to promote its goals — the EU has similar designs.
RSS