As expected, pan-blue and pan-green camp supporters clashed at CKS International Airport yesterday when Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) departed on his visit to China, where he will meet with Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤). The bloody clashes showed that Lien's "peace visit" lost its peacefulness even before he left the country.
Many Taiwanese -- especially pan-green camp supporters -- object to Lien's visit. One reason is Lien's bad timing: his trip comes shortly after China passed its "Anti-Secession" Law authorizing force against Taiwan. But the heart of the problem is that Lien is meeting with a Chinese Communist Party bureaucrat who once ruthlessly suppressed the Tibetan people, and who now perpetuates a one-party dictatorship, tramples on human rights and suppresses religious freedoms. The fact that Lien will sit down to talk with a man who has the blood of his own people on his hands is frightening and unsettling to many people in Taiwan.
Pan-green camp supporters are furious that Lien should visit China without even dignifying President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) with a visit before leaving. They also worry that Lien will do whatever he can to join hands with China and manipulate Taiwanese elections so that the KMT can regain its hold on power. There is a lot of Chinese government money at work behind the scenes at several Taiwanese newspapers and TV stations. People have already been angered by the outrageous reports in such China-funded media outlets supporting the pan-blue camp and smearing the pan-green camp at election time.
Just as the Chinese government is searching for a way to proceed toward its goal of unification, and looking for someone who can act as their spokesman here, leaders of Taiwan's opposition parties have thrown themselves into China's embrace. They could become Beijing's mouthpieces, who -- through the abuse of Taiwan's cherished freedom of the press -- will seek to undermine the democratic institutions Taiwan has established with so much difficulty, and drag the country into a bog of political and social division. Faced with this prospect, it's not surprising that many Taiwanese have been so vocal in their calls that Lien not sell out his country.
Pan-blue camp supporters say that Lien will be talking to Hu about China's purchase of Taiwan's agricultural products, greater protection for the lives and property of Taiwanese businesspeople in China and even the withdrawal of missiles currently targeted at Taiwan. But these issues are not the chief cause of Taiwan's deep-rooted resentment of China's power. That animosity stems from China's rejection of democracy, which has put an unbridgeable gulf between the lifestyles and social systems of the two peoples on either side of the Taiwan Strait. Even if Beijing did agree to withdraw its missiles, the majority of the Taiwanese people would still not agree to unify with China.
Taiwan has experienced the oppressive government of the Japanese colonial regime and that of the KMT. What they value more than anything else is the freedom to live as they choose, guaranteed by a democratic system whose liberties can be ranked with that of any advanced nation in the world.
Yesterday, the people protesting at the airport were defending these cherished universal values. They were making their views plain to Lien, a man who might threaten such values. They are fighting for Taiwan's democracy and freedom and rejecting a slavery that violates human dignity. Even if Beijing is able to buy some of Taiwan's politicians, it will never win over the Taiwanese people.
As the war in Burma stretches into its 76th year, China continues to play both sides. Beijing backs the junta, which seized power in the 2021 coup, while also funding some of the resistance groups fighting the regime. Some suggest that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is hedging his bets, positioning China to side with the victors regardless of the outcome. However, a more accurate explanation is that China is acting pragmatically to safeguard its investments and ensure the steady flow of natural resources and energy for its economy. China’s primary interest is stability and supporting the junta initially seemed like the best
The US election result will significantly impact its foreign policy with global implications. As tensions escalate in the Taiwan Strait and conflicts elsewhere draw attention away from the western Pacific, Taiwan was closely monitoring the election, as many believe that whoever won would confront an increasingly assertive China, especially with speculation over a potential escalation in or around 2027. A second Donald Trump presidency naturally raises questions concerning the future of US policy toward China and Taiwan, with Trump displaying mixed signals as to his position on the cross-strait conflict. US foreign policy would also depend on Trump’s Cabinet and
Numerous expert analyses characterize today’s US presidential election as a risk for Taiwan, given that the two major candidates, US Vice President Kamala Harris and former US president Donald Trump, are perceived to possess divergent foreign policy perspectives. If Harris is elected, many presume that the US would maintain its existing relationship with Taiwan, as established through the American Institute in Taiwan, and would continue to sell Taiwan weapons and equipment to help it defend itself against China. Under the administration of US President Joe Biden, whose political views Harris shares, the US on Oct. 25 authorized arms transfers to Taiwan, another
Navy Commander Admiral Tang Hua (唐華) said in an interview with The Economist that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has been implementing an “anaconda strategy” to subdue Taiwan since President William Lai (賴清德) assumed office. The Chinese military is “slowly, but surely” increasing its presence around Taiwan proper, it quoted Tang as saying. “They are ready to blockade Taiwan at any time they want,” he said. “They give you extreme pressure, pressure, pressure. They’re trying to exhaust you.” Beijing’s goal is to “force Taiwan to make mistakes,” Tang said, adding that they could be “excuses” for a blockade. The interview reminds me