First lady Wu Shu-jen's (吳淑珍) successful visit to Washington climaxed with her speeches at a congressional reception and at the American Enterprise Institute, and with a chance meeting with important American friends during a formal dinner reception at Twin Oaks.
In a media culture that has enthusiasm only for reporting bad news, Wu's courtesy visit, like the countless other uncontroversial visits by political figures from other countries, did not receive special attention from the US media. This is fundamentally compatible with the interests of both sides. The goal of the Taiwanese government is to simply have Wu visit Capitol Hill, and attend some friendship events that are compatible with Wu's status as the first lady but do not make things too difficult for the US. On the other hand, the US views the visit as simply a low-profile personal visit.
In this regard, both Taiwan and US have accomplished what they sought to accomplish. The visit highlights the deep friendship between the two sides, and the US' respect and firm support for democratic Taiwan.
Restrained by objective political obstacles, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) cannot visit the US himself. So, the first lady went on this physically demanding trip in her husband's place. Despite needing a wheelchair to get around, she is determined to do help Taiwan's diplomatic efforts in the US. This kind of spirit has truly moved members of the US Congress. Several members of Congress specifically praised Wu's determination to fight for Taiwan's democracy from her wheelchair.
To China, Wu's low profile is also good. Before Wu's visit, all reporting by wire news services, without exception, included a prediction that the first lady's visit would enrage China. But, China has obviously learned some lessons on public relations in the US over the past few years. It is beginning to realize that the harder it punches Taiwan, the more the attention of the US media is aroused, resulting in even more free publicity for Taiwan. Therefore, this time around, China's response has been low profile. Only a spokesperson from its ministry of foreign relations issued a predictable statement.
Wu holds no official government post. Her visit cannot be characterized "official" just because she met with US government officials. Therefore, China has no grounds to get angry with the US. If it did, not only would the friendly atmosphere between the two countries be destroyed before Chinese President Jiang Zemin's (江澤民) visit to the US, but the US may retaliate. Moreover, as soon as Beijing gets angry, the US media becomes interested. Then the position of Taiwan wins even more publicity, making Beijing look increasingly bad.
Wu's visit is not completely free of controversy. But the controversy was due mostly to differences in ideologies and political views among the ethnic Chinese communities in the US. Wu's characterization of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and the comparisons she made between herself and China's first lady did not invite attention or controversy in the US media. They only triggered some expected responses from some communities in Los Angeles and New York.
The so-called "traditional Chinese community" refused to attend the welcoming reception hosted by ethnic Chinese communities because of her disrespect for Chiang. In Washington, some Chinese communities also refused to participate in the welcoming events. But, after some prodding by Taiwan's representative office there, the leaders of these communities eventually came out to attend the welcoming reception.
Over the past 30 years, the role of pro-Taiwan Chinese communities on Capitol Hill, especially the Taiwanese community, usually involved carrying banners to protest. From the KMT government's blacklists and political oppression, to the US visits of Chinese leaders such as Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), Li Peng (李鵬) and Jiang Zemin, these were all reasons to hit the street and protest. They've never had the chance to become the target of protests themselves. The first lady's US visit gave these communities a brand new experience. While they were welcoming Wu in the hotel lobby, about a dozen pro-China Chinese-Americans protested outside.
Moreover, these protesters, who supported the "Great China" ideology, had already appeared outside Twin Oaks on Sept. 24. With American flags in their hands, they chanted pro-China slogans such as "one China," "1992 consensus," "Taiwan is part of China" and "no Taiwan independence." On Sept. 25, the same gang and slogans showed up outside the hotel in which Wu's welcoming reception was being held. They did not dare to carry the flag of any of Taiwan's political parties. Nor did they dare carry the Chinese national flag. They carried with them only a few American flags and an ROC flag. They seemed to be in a rather awkward position.
The above-described scene stood in strong contrast with what was transpiring inside, where women's groups of Taiwan were demanding that a message be forwarded to A-bian that they strongly supported his "one country on each side" talk and Taiwan's participation in the UN under the name "Taiwan." In particular, they pointed out the urgency of rectifying the name of Taiwan.
Name rectification is a unique problem for Taiwan. There is an internal movement within Taiwan to rectify the country's name and remove the name ROC. They say that the name ROC is often confused with the name PRC and implies an illusory "one China" connotation. They demand that the name familiar to the international community, Taiwan, be used. This is the thinking of the nativized political parties and individuals with nativized ideologies. However, it is something that the pan-blue camp is unwilling to accept. Last month, a delegation comprised of pan-blue lawmakers visited Washington. They wanted to conduct an entirely different kind of name rectification movement. To the surprise and disbelief of the members of the US Congress, they asked that the name of the "Taiwan Caucus" be rectified to "ROC Caucus."
Is this the so-called pan-blue ideology? After all, even former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) had merrily accepted the name "Taiwan Relations Act." He did not ask that the US rectify the name of that law to "ROC Relations Act."
Actually, the US government, Congress and the media have long used the name Taiwan. They rarely ever use the official name that this country still holds, ROC. For example, members of Congress all addressed her as "first lady of Taiwan" during their speeches at the congressional reception. Wu already called herself "first lady of Taiwan" during her own speeches.
Wu has a very uncomplicated, witty and direct personality. She dislikes adherence to formal rules. In this regard, she is somewhat like Barbara Bush, the wife of former president George Bush. She is not accustomed to diplomacy. Instead, she prefers to get right to the point. During meetings with reporters, she repeatedly said "don't be too serious."
Because she doesn't like to make things too serious, she has the habit of putting things in her own words, rather than strictly reading from the speech prepared for her. While this does not present a translation problem, the overall effect of her speech is reduced on Chinese language media.
The first lady may get many more chances to fight for Taiwan's diplomacy. Speeches prepared for her by the bureaucrats should give more consideration to language Wu is used to, so that it would be much easier for her to read from the script on more formal occasions.
James Wang is a senior journalist base in Washington
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS