With the possible entrance of China and Taiwan to the World Trade Organization in the near future, the issues of the `three links' has once again emerged on the political stage.
Of the three, direct flight, the most sensitive issue, has attracted the greatest attention. A few days ago, local media reported that an official in China's civil airline sector proposed a number of solutions for direct flights between China and Taiwan. One of them was, surprisingly, identical with a suggestion that I made roughly one and half months ago following presidential candidate Chen Shiu-bian's (
I suggested that airline companies on each side of the Taiwan Strait set up a consortium. The two consortiums could then invest equally in a brand new airline company. With a special permit from both governments, the company could handle direct flights between Taiwan and China. The company could also be rightfully named `Strait Airlines.'
The background of the proposal is as follows: whether the Taiwan government accepts the idea or not, pressure for direct flights will increase significantly after both sides enter the WTO.
If Taiwan continues to insist, as it now does, that specific criteria must be fulfilled before a direct flight agreement can be made, then it should at least make a few proposals on the matter and submit them to cross-strait negotiation.
Otherwise, continuing to oppose the idea of direct flights without providing constructive suggestions would bring shame on Taiwan for "breaking the spirit of the WTO."
I consulted Su Chi (
Nevertheless, the MAC has long had a set pattern to deal with the direct flight issue -- namely, ensuring that the principles of "dignity" and "security" are taken care of. "Dignity" means "equality between the two sides." It means Taiwan should never be degraded by being regarded as a "local government" during the negotiation process and in the flight agreement. "Security" demands that Taiwan's safety should not be endangered by direct flights.
Responding to pleas for direct flights, the MAC would always mention these two principles and say no direct flight agreement would be signed before the two principles were guaranteed.
However, a proposal that meets the two principles does exist. With respect to "dignity," the question that worries Taiwan -- equality between the two sides -- in fact may be dealt with by neglecting it in the flight agreement.
One solution is that both Taiwan and China authorize their civil aviation associations to sign a flight agreement, including license recognition, flight frequency and departure-arrival destinations. In order to avoid the "sovereignty controversy" the authority to issue the necessary licenses could also be delegated to the association of each side. By doing so, the dignity of Taiwan is not harmed.
As for security, the things that worry Taiwan the most are the decrease in the strategic depth of its air defenses, the decrease in the amount of time its early warning system can give of an attack and the threat of Chinese aircraft landing on the island.
Nevertheless, modern military technology can easily differentiate between military and civilian aircraft. The problems with the early warning system and strategic depth are not likely to be become unsolvable difficulties.
Secondly, under my proposal, aircraft flying between China and Taiwan would not be "pure communist" planes, but ones controlled and supervised by a company in which Taiwan holds a 50 percent stake. In other words, the non-existence of a "pure communist" plane makes fear of communist aircraft landing redundant.
The major criticisms of Chen's "single way direct flight" suggestion are that it proposes privileges for Taiwan that are apparently unacceptable for China, whereas the "single flight" precedent does exist in international flight.
For instance, Taiwan-Austria flights are carried out solely by a Taiwan carrier, EVA Airways, on the grounds that it increases the number of Taiwanese tourists going to Austria and that most of the passengers on these flights are Taiwanese who would usually travel by national aircraft.
A one-way direct between Taiwan and China might not be impossible in an environment in which China is longing for direct flights. However, from an international standpoint, Chen's proposal smacks of being egotistical.
Compared with Chen's proposal, my solution does not, apparently, give Taiwan special privileges. It also resolves the problem of the Chinese acceptance by incorporating both sides into one single company.
Just last month in Shanghai, Chinese authorities suggested "both sides jointly set up an airline company to serve as a direct flight carrier."
For Taiwan, in addition to the Guidelines for National Unification (
In any case, Taiwan should never count on using the "Chinese hostility" orthodoxy in response to outside pressures. On the contrary, Taiwan should actively search for constructive solution.
From the strategic standpoint, looking at the international competition between Taiwan and China, Taiwan must propose a solution to the problem.
Shen Fu-hsiung is a legislator.
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
RSS