President Chen Shui-bian (
Legislators from the pan-blue camp want to amend the Statute Governing the Relations between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (
But the big question remains of who will lead such negotiations. There have been a variety of suggestions, but the commercial negotiation mechanism used for cross-strait negotiations under the WTO agreement seems to be the best approach. Using this mechanism would elevate the links issue to the level of international commercial relations. It would also comply with the government's view of the Chinese market as a key part in Taiwan's internationalization efforts.
The SEF and China's Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait have conducted negotiations in the past. No new negotiation channels would have to be established if they were used -- as would be the case if private companies or associations negotiated directly with their counterparts. The transportation question involves many issues that require authorization and certification from public institutions and this would cause lengthy delays in the negotiations. Remember how drawn out the Taiwan-Hong Kong aviation pact negotiations were?
In fact, to talk about opening direct links is a bit of a misnomer, since both postal and business links have basically been open for a while. Transportation links remain the sole sticking point.
Although China said that it now views direct links from a cross-strait perspective instead of a domestic one, it still wants to restrict participation to transport companies from the two sides of the Strait and bar international companies. This is tantamount to viewing the Strait as a domestic waterway and navigation rights as domestic in nature.
The international community should make sure its voice is heard. The Strait is an international waterway and restricting access to it, even if just for traffic between China and Taiwan, is not acceptable. Taiwan has long been a busy international transfer center. Even if Taipei and Beijing were to privately reach such an agreement, the international business community would be unlikely to accept it.
The opening of direct transport links would be a significant milestone in cross-strait reconciliation efforts. But that doesn't mean the connection will be an easy one to implement or maintain. Many in Taiwan question the sincerity of Chinese officials, feeling that the "honey-mouthed and dagger-hearted" Beijing government is simply launching another propaganda campaign. After all, at the annual Beidaihe conference in September, Chinese leaders said that using business to pursue unification is more effective than politics or missiles.
If China wishes to push reconciliation forward, it could start by changing its attitude and its approach. Removing the hundreds of missiles deployed along its coastline targeted at Taiwan would go a long way toward erasing the doubts and fears people here have about Beijing.
After all, in view of the cross-strait arms race, opening direct links so that aircraft and missiles could fly together and cargoships and warships sail side-by-side is contradictory and incomprehensible .
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
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,
Strategic thinker Carl von Clausewitz has said that “war is politics by other means,” while investment guru Warren Buffett has said that “tariffs are an act of war.” Both aphorisms apply to China, which has long been engaged in a multifront political, economic and informational war against the US and the rest of the West. Kinetically also, China has launched the early stages of actual global conflict with its threats and aggressive moves against Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan, and its support for North Korea’s reckless actions against South Korea that could reignite the Korean War. Former US presidents Barack Obama
RSS