It seems a shame to many international observers that singer Chang Hui-mei (
It speaks poorly of the Chinese that they chose to mix politics with the entertainment industry. Did Chen do the same, by blacklisting some of the Taiwanese artists who chose to support the pan-blue camp in both the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections? Were these artists or their careers affected in any way? That itself would sum up the key difference between the political cultures in communist China and democratic Taiwan. The former tolerates no dissenting views, and everyone has to abide by the "emperor's wishes." On the other hand, the latter advocates genuine freedom and choice, even on matters such as political affiliation.
China has to realize that politics has to be kept separate from other aspects of the people's lives, be it the sports, entertainment or even economic industries. If one day Arsenal star striker Thierry Henry were to visit Taiwan and acknow-ledged that he enjoyed his stay in Taipei, would the Chinese authorities ban him or his Arsenal squad from visiting China?
Apparently they would not, given the mass appeal of the English Premiership champions. Why then the double standard treatment dished out to artists such as A-mei or even Taiwanese businessmen who are pro-Taiwan? I suspect the protest by the students last week was crafted by the Chinese authorities. That would be both silly and naive of the Chinese authorities. As the saying goes, "forbidden fruit always tastes sweeter." The more China seeks to "punish" pro-Taiwan artists by banning their access to the Chinese market, the more likely it will become that its own citizens would seek other ways of supporting these performers, whether by ordering the singers' CDs online or by getting information from the Internet.
It is simply time for China to realize that in order to improve cross-strait relations, they have to deal with Chen at the highest level. They have to stop their silly antics of finding fault with Taiwanese, whether artists or businesspeople. The ball has been in China's court since May 2000. Unfortunately, they chose to play the wrong ballgame over the past four years. Chen has been seeking talks and negotiations with the Chinese authorities since first becoming president in 2000, but to no avail.
In conclusion, I would like to pose a question to pro-China candidates Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜): How do they view China's actions with regard to the A-mei incidents, both in May 2000 and last week's "protests," supposedly by the students?
Jason Lee
Singapore
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
On the eve of the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) made a statement that provoked unprecedented repudiations among the European diplomats in Taipei. Chu said during a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that what President William Lai (賴清德) has been doing to the opposition is equivalent to what Adolf Hitler did in Nazi Germany, referencing ongoing investigations into the KMT’s alleged forgery of signatures used in recall petitions against Democratic Progressive Party legislators. In response, the German Institute Taipei posted a statement to express its “deep disappointment and concern”
RSS