The reopening of talks between the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) and the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS), together with partial agreements on charter flights and increased Chinese tourism to Taiwan, has generated considerable interest in Taiwan to take the next step. More people, including many government personnel, will be able to visit China; civic groups are seeking to do the same. And at the top, the president is now seeking a “comprehensive economic cooperation pact” with China.
The first two agreements have been discussed for some time, but only now have they been accepted by both sides. Other agreements, such as allowing cargo flights, may eventually see the light of day. But continuing discussions with China on almost any subject will require expert advisers who understand the issues.
Reaching agreement on any subject will take much time, while the content of closed-door discussions — at least in democratic Taiwan — will inevitably become public, if not always in its entirety.
In seeking an economic cooperation pact, for example, the issues involved should be discussed in public. If not, any agreements made could lead to problems that will be difficult to resolve. As an example, there is the so-called “1992 consensus”: In invoking this slogan, China does not broach all that the term means to it, while Taiwan backs away from defending its sovereignty. Using past ambiguities to deal with today’s issues may not be wise.
Neither side wants to raise sensitive issues in discussions, and ambiguity will continue to prevail. So how will the people of Taiwan — a full democracy whose people have the right to know what its government is doing — be assured that their fundamental rights are being protected? This is a delicate and difficult task, and it falls to the president and his administration to meet both sides’ expectations.
The president’s first step was the SEF-ARATS meeting in Beijing. This was more important than the two agreements on flights and tourism. At the next meeting, it will harder to reach further agreement. And even if the meeting only covers economic matters, issues such as Taiwan’s need for international space will become increasingly difficult to ignore.
The problem is that signing a “comprehensive economic cooperation pact” with China without agreeing on fundamental issues such as political matters could be dangerous. The Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) administration has yet to state clearly what it wants for Taiwan. This is becoming clearer to China and the US, as it is to the Taiwanese public.
Few Taiwanese media outlets seem to focus on substantial domestic issues; instead, stories on cross-strait and Chinese affairs proliferate, while recently the sinking of a Taiwanese boat off the Diaoyutai (釣魚台) islets by the Japanese coast guard has taken up most of the coverage.
A recent opinion poll by the TVBS cable news channel showed that government approval ratings have dropped to 41 percent; that 60 percent are dissatisfied with increasing inflation and that 45 percent disapprove of the handling of the Diaoyutais incident. Only the handling of ties with China gained higher approval at 60 percent.
This highlights the importance of the domestic issues that the public considers to be the most pressing. Higher prices, especially the rising cost of oil and food, are a priority.
There is an interest in maintaining the status quo — protecting the country’s democracy is part of this — and in bolstering economic growth. Yet the names “Taiwan” and “Taiwanese,” the issue of sovereignty, and for many eventual de jure independence, remain in the wings.
Establishing a broad pact with China on a number of issues could easily generate problems with many smaller issues in which meaning is clouded by ambiguity.
Taiwan should continue pursuing a constructive relationship with China, of course, but the results should be acceptable to Taiwanese.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
Chinese state-owned companies COSCO Shipping Corporation and China Merchants have a 30 percent stake in Kaohsiung Port’s Kao Ming Container Terminal (Terminal No. 6) and COSCO leases Berths 65 and 66. It is extremely dangerous to allow Chinese companies or state-owned companies to operate critical infrastructure. Deterrence theorists are familiar with the concepts of deterrence “by punishment” and “by denial.” Deterrence by punishment threatens an aggressor with prohibitive costs (like retaliation or sanctions) that outweigh the benefits of their action, while deterrence by denial aims to make an attack so difficult that it becomes pointless. Elbridge Colby, currently serving as the Under
The Ministry of the Interior on Thursday last week said it ordered Internet service providers to block access to Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu (小紅書, also known as RedNote in English) for a year, citing security risks and more than 1,700 alleged fraud cases on the platform since last year. The order took effect immediately, abruptly affecting more than 3 million users in Taiwan, and sparked discussions among politicians, online influencers and the public. The platform is often described as China’s version of Instagram or Pinterest, combining visual social media with e-commerce, and its users are predominantly young urban women,
Most Hong Kongers ignored the elections for its Legislative Council (LegCo) in 2021 and did so once again on Sunday. Unlike in 2021, moderate democrats who pledged their allegiance to Beijing were absent from the ballots this year. The electoral system overhaul is apparent revenge by Beijing for the democracy movement. On Sunday, the Hong Kong “patriots-only” election of the LegCo had a record-low turnout in the five geographical constituencies, with only 1.3 million people casting their ballots on the only seats that most Hong Kongers are eligible to vote for. Blank and invalid votes were up 50 percent from the previous
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi lit a fuse the moment she declared that trouble for Taiwan means trouble for Japan. Beijing roared, Tokyo braced and like a plot twist nobody expected that early in the story, US President Donald Trump suddenly picked up the phone to talk to her. For a man who normally prefers to keep Asia guessing, the move itself was striking. What followed was even more intriguing. No one outside the room knows the exact phrasing, the tone or the diplomatic eyebrow raises exchanged, but the broad takeaway circulating among people familiar with the call was this: Trump did