A recent report by a US scholar disclosed that some of Taiwan's politicians traveled to China and asked the Chinese Communist Party not have any dealings with President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), so as to prevent Chen from gaining points at home.
While the disclosure may have caused some ripples in local political circles, it's no mystery that some Taiwanese go to China and kiss up to Beijing, offering advice about how to restrain Taiwan. Such activities only began after the Chen administration took power, but now that things have gotten so ridiculous that it is revealed to US scholars by Beijing -- one feels especially saddened and hurt.
Taiwan's "small versus big" relationship to China is disadvantageous. Taiwan faces a real military threat from Beijing. Only through concerted effort will it be able to successfully defend itself.
For many years, however, what we have seen is a divided Taiwan struggling to resist a united China. Politicians, interest groups and even political parties have selfishly applied pressure on the government to accept conditions proposed by Beijing. These entities will reproach the Taiwan government, saying that it must take responsibility for stalemated cross-strait relations, yet they never dare criticize or condemn Beijing's rude, rigid stance or threats to use military might. These people are a disgrace to Taiwan, and have absolutely no chance of winning Beijing's respect.
There is an American expression "politics stops at the water's edge," meaning that politics needs to have its limits. Foreign policy cannot become the sacrificial object of factional fighting. In foreign policy, there should be no "opposition." The nation's interests should be collectively defended -- anything else would be denounced in the media as being unpatriotic, and could possibly end one's political life.
Unfortunately, all too often we see some people in Taiwan take pleasure in criticizing their own government and policy in front of foreigners -- especially in front of China's leadership. We hope and trust the foreign scholar's report on this latest unpatriotic display does not reflect the policy of a certain local political party, but rather is only the actions of individual members of that party.
Regardless of what might prove to be the case, the revelation exposes an internal crisis in Taiwan, as well as the urgent need for ruling and opposition parties to seek and establish a consensus on foreign policy. If no such effort is made, Taiwan will slowly surrender itself piece by piece, eventually buckling under China's pressure.
Beijing has consistently adopted a "peace-war strategy" vis-a-vis Taiwan, excelling at "united front" warfare. These tactics succeed because of Taiwan's internal problems. It is only because some people do their utmost to sacrifice Taiwan's interests in order to curry favor with Beijing, that China's leadership is given a host of opportunities to exploit.
This is also the main reason why, for many years, Beijing has assumed such a haughty attitude toward Taiwan, refusing to restore cross-strait dialogue. If everyone in Taiwan put the country first and considered problems from the perspective of national security, Beijing's united front would cease to be effective. And once its two-pronged strategy of propaganda and military threats fails to scare us, China will finally begin to view Taiwan as an opponent worthy of respect.
Establishing a consensus on China policy is not impossible. At the National Development Conference (國家發展會議) held in December 1996, the ruling and opposition parties reached a consensus on 36 items, including developing cross-strait relations based on protecting national survival and development; development of cross-strait economy/trade taking political risks into consideration; opposing cross-strait relations on the basis of "one country, two systems" should be opposed; the resolution of direct links through negotiations at the appropriate time, in accordance with the principles of security and mutual benefit; and the government's creation of a carefully-planned policy regarding the movement of Taiwan enterprises investing in China.
The passage of time has not caused these consensuses to lose their value. The ruling and opposition parties can take the 36 items that were agreed upon in 1996 as a base and make progress toward reaching even more consensuses in the area of China policy.
On Saturday the ruling and opposition parties convened for cross-party negotiations. We hope that the negotiations will produce more than just arguments over how to yield to Beijing's conditions and promote the resolutions passed at the Economic Development Advisory Conference.
We also hope that there will not be haggling over how to divide political booty after the year-end elections. Instead, we hope that the negotiations will transcend the selfish interests of party factions, and proceed conscientiously -- with a responsible attitude toward future generations -- establishing a basis for Taiwan's secure, flourishing prosperity, as well as consolidating the consensus between ruling and opposition parties on China policy.
Lin Wen-cheng is director of the Institute of Mainland China Studies at National Sun Yat-sen University.
Translated by Scudder Smith
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
RSS