At the opening of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) National Congress, Chinese President Hu Jintao (
The problem with Beijing's new PR blitz is that it is stuck in the realm of Beijing's old "united front" effort for "unification."
These words nonetheless succinctly defined Beijing's misrepresentation of problems between Taiwan and China.
"A formal end to the state of hostility between the two sides" isn't really necessary given that Taiwan and Taiwanese haven't contemplated any hostile acts against China. Hundreds of billions of dollars in Taiwanese investment in China so far can attest to this fact.
If there is any "state of hostility," it's unilateral, as evinced by nearly 1,000 missiles targeting Taiwan and a myriad of threats not the least of which is the enactment of the "Anti-secession" Law. As soon as Beijing formally removes them, the hostility can "end."
Historically, "the two sides" to which Hu referred mean the CCP and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Millions died in clashes between the two for the control of China before the KMT was defeated and fled to Taiwan.
The hostility formally ended in 2005 when former KMT chairman Lien Chan (
Nowadays, the CCP and the KMT embrace each other with no want of exchanges, dialogue and consultations and negotiations in their concerted effort to undermine Taiwanese society for the ultimate goal of "unifying" Taiwan with China.
The "hostility" is therefore nothing but a fabrication by Beijing to justify its belligerence.
Under the prerequisite that the party "recognizes that both sides of the strait belong to one China," "any political party in Taiwan" referenced in Hu's statement could only mean the KMT. If Hu were referring to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), the condition would make his proposal dead on arrival as a statement to the contrary is etched in the DPP charter.
While the prerequisite implies that Beijing has no interest talking to anyone who isn't ready to relinquish Taiwan to China, to call a statement like this a peace overture is ludicrous.
Although "the two sides" might not have bilateral animosity, Beijing does have an axe to grind regarding Taiwan's use of the Republic of China (ROC) name.
The original ROC died when the People's Republic of China (PRC) was created in 1949. The present ROC is a shell created by Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and forced on the Taiwanese people soon after his arrival in Taiwan. Chiang at the time wielded this re-minted ROC as "legitimacy" for the KMT's brutal rule lest the KMT be regarded as just a vanquished armed band from China.
It should be further noted that after the PRC replaced the ROC in China, Chiang's use of the word "China" in his ROC was an act of identity theft. For geopolitical consideration during the Korean War and the Vietnam War, the West entertained Chiang's folly for more than two decades before China gained a UN seat in 1971. The US ended Chiang's masquerade in 1979 when it severed formal relations with the ROC.
Even though China has a legitimate grievance with the ROC shell any attempt to expand the complaint into a claim on Taiwan and the Taiwanese people, whose biggest "crime" might be their meek harboring of a looted identity, would still be more than preposterous. The fact remains that Beijing vehemently objects to Taiwan's discard of the shell lest "justification" for China's taking of Taiwan be diminished.
That could only give Taiwanese more reasons not to keep the ROC any longer than necessary. Shedding the moniker deserves to be looked upon as an urgent national security matter that can't afford procrastination.
Although aggression needs no excuse, getting rid of even the flimsiest subterfuge would expose Beijing as the pure aggressor it is, the poisoned olive branch currently on display notwithstanding.
Huang Jei-hsuan
California
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
An article published in the Dec. 12, 1949, edition of the Central Daily News (中央日報) bore a headline with the intimidating phrase: “You Cannot Escape.” The article was about the execution of seven “communist spies,” some say on the basis of forced confessions, at the end of the 713 Penghu Incident. Those were different times, born of political paranoia shortly after the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) relocated to Taiwan following defeat in China by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The phrase was a warning by the KMT regime to the local populace not to challenge its power or threaten national unity. The
Philippine Coast Guard spokesman Jay Tarriela on March 1 was promoted from commodore to rear admiral from Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. The promotion is a striking testament to how Beijing’s intimidation tactics on its current main target in the South China Sea have backfired. It is also yet another example that Taiwan can look to when it comes to responding to Chinese scare campaigns. Tarriela has been consistent in his approach since Manila launched its transparency initiative in early 2023 to counter Chinese “gray zone” tactics around its western waters. As the face of the West Philippine Sea Transparency Office,
The Iran war has exposed a fundamental vulnerability in the global energy system. The escalating confrontation between Iran, Israel and the US has begun to shake international energy markets, largely because Iran is disrupting shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. This narrow waterway carries roughly one-third of the world’s seaborne oil, making it one of the most strategically sensitive energy corridors in the world. Even the possibility of disruption has triggered sharp volatility in global oil prices. The duration and scope of the conflict remain uncertain, with senior US officials offering contradictory signals about how long military operations might continue.
RSS