President Chen Shui-bian (
In recent years, there have been frequent reports that Taiwan engages in dollar diplomacy and the public is upset about it. When the DPP was the opposition party, it often criticized the KMT for its "sucker diplomacy," but after coming to power, it has continued to follow in the KMT's footsteps, writing one fat check after another.
Obviously, despite the transfer of power two years ago, foreign policy has not changed. The reason for the lack of change isn't merely casual acceptance of old routines, but rather that there have been no significant changes in Taiwan's diplomatic situation. Unless the party in power stops caring about the number of allies that recognize Taiwan, heavy foreign aid spending is unavoidable.
Since both the ruling and opposition parties have engaged in "sucker diplomacy" and the opposition has increased its supervision of the foreign aid budget, why has the opposition chosen this moment to suddenly raise its voice and criticize Chen's performance abroad? In part, I fear, their criticism is related to comments made by the president while abroad.
Although Chen called his African trip "a journey of humanitarian concern," in fact he gave people quite a different impression. The speeches he delivered during the trip conveyed the impression that his real concern wasn't with our allies at all, but rather with domestic political problems. Less than four days after setting off, Chen blasted the opposition parties, saying that he would soon set in motion a cross-party "alliance for national stabilization" and remarking that the opposition alliance is "following a dead-end path and has little life left in it."
These remarks from the president increased the tension between the ruling and opposition parties. During the president's travels abroad, his focus should be on our allies. Everyone is now curious as to why he chose to make such critical and inflammatory statements while overseas.
Since Chen relentlessly tweaked political nerves back home during his trip, his diplomatic agenda was overshadowed. The media stopped showing any interest in his African journey. The only thing that concerned anyone was how Chen would form his proposed alliance. Even after Chen returned home and declared that his journey had been a great success, who cared?
The press conference held by the KMT legislative caucus revealed the seriousness of the rift between the ruling and opposition parties. No matter how much goodwill Chen brought back with him from his trip overseas, all the public sees is political wrangling.
The president's shots at the opposition from abroad and his wrangling with the opposition deserve criticism, regardless of the time or place of his comments. However, the opposition's failure to confine discussion to the issues at hand and its attempts to axe the president's travel budget are mistaken. To be fair, Chen's overseas visits have been helpful in cement-ing alliances, rallying overseas Chinese and boosting diplomatic morale. They should be supported across party lines. Chen should receive applause for his willingness to visit our African allies, most of which are poor nations.
As for the proper amount of economic assistance that should be given to allies, this problem didn't begin with Chen, nor will it end with him. The ruling and opposition parties should work together in a calm and fair manner to review how dollar diplomacy can be fixed. Even if the ruling and opposition parties changed places and viewpoints, there should be no substantial change in foreign relations and foreign aid policy. The only difference should be in who carries out the policy and who criticizes it.
For Chen personally, this African journey should serve as a learning experience. The lengthy comments he made about domestic politics while he was abroad not only obscured the initiative he showed in visiting Africa but could result in the sacrifice of the diplomatic budget on the altar of partisan strife.
Everything has become politicized in Taiwan. If the president throws political curveballs even when he is abroad, then the expression that "foreign policy is an extension of domestic policy" may be rephrased as "foreign policy is an extension of domestic political strife." Chen should bear this lesson in mind, especially when he goes abroad again. Opposition parties should also exercise restraint. They shouldn't let their burning dissatisfaction with the president result in collateral damage to the foreign-policy budget. After all, the ruling and opposition parties need to seek a unified approach to relations with the outside world.
Kao Lang is a professor in the department of political science at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Ethan Harkness
In an article published in Newsweek on Monday last week, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged China to retake territories it lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. “If it is really for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t China take back Russia?” Lai asked, referring to territories lost in 1858 and 1860. The territories once made up the two flanks of northern Manchuria. Once ceded to Russia, they became part of the Russian far east. Claims since then have been made that China and Russia settled the disputes in the 1990s through the 2000s and that “China
Trips to the Kenting Peninsula in Pingtung County have dredged up a lot of public debate and furor, with many complaints about how expensive and unreasonable lodging is. Some people even call it a tourist “butchering ground.” Many local business owners stake claims to beach areas by setting up parasols and driving away people who do not rent them. The managing authority for the area — Kenting National Park — has long ignored the issue. Ultimately, this has affected the willingness of domestic travelers to go there, causing tourist numbers to plummet. In 2008, Taiwan opened the door to Chinese tourists and in
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) arrest is a significant development. He could have become president or vice president on a shared TPP-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) ticket and could have stood again in 2028. If he is found guilty, there would be little chance of that, but what of his party? What about the third force in Taiwanese politics? What does this mean for the disenfranchised young people who he attracted, and what does it mean for his ambitious and ideologically fickle right-hand man, TPP caucus leader Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌)? Ko and Huang have been appealing to that
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does