The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) have different opinions on the cross-strait “diplomatic ceasefire.” In August 2000, then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), said diplomacy was a necessary activity, hence not only would there not be a diplomatic ceasefire, but Taiwan would try harder to form diplomatic ties. During the DPP’s time in office, Taiwan lost six allies, but its participation in intergovernmental international organizations soared.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) proposed the idea of a diplomatic ceasefire in 2006. He also mentioned cross-strait “reconciliation and ceasefire” in his inaugural address. However, Ma’s definition of a “diplomatic ceasefire” — its content, scope, implementation, pros and cons — all await clarification.
Under a diplomatic ceasefire Taiwan would have to accept the “one China” principle. The KMT has announced its acceptance of “one China with each side having its own interpretation” as the so-called “1992 consensus,” thus basically subscribing to the “one China” principle. However, such an unconditional compromise make the diplomatic ceasefire dependent on Beijing’s goodwill.
Beijing has always said Taiwan can have international, but not diplomatic, space. However, China also has to remember that the KMT will not be in power forever. If a diplomatic ceasefire is firmly established, and the DPP returned to power, Beijing would be trapped by its own promises. Another problem with a diplomatic ceasefire is that China would be between a rock and hard place if a diplomatic ally of Taiwan wished to establish ties with Beijing.
Minister of Foreign Affairs Francisco Ou (歐鴻鍊) has said Taiwan will focus on consolidating relations with diplomatic allies, rather than seeking to grab allies from China. However, if Taiwan does not seek new allies, and fails to keep all that it now has, we will end up with the lowest number of diplomatic allies since 1971. There is also a risk that a ceasefire would lessen our diplomats’ sense of crisis and thus their willingness to respond to new challenges.
With a diplomatic ceasefire, Taiwan’s participation in international intergovernmental organizations should see a quantitative increase. The ways in which it participates in international conferences and the types of conferences it can attend should also increase.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told the Wall Street Journal that although the US encourages a relaxation of cross-strait relations, it also has a relationship with Taiwan, and would like to see Taiwan have more space in the international community, such as in the WHO.
Yet, Taiwan Affairs Office Director Wang Yi (王毅) takes a different tack. In a meeting with a Japanese parliamentary delegation on June 23, he said Beijing does not accept official Taiwanese membership in the WHO, and is only willing to establish a new framework to allow Taiwan to share medical information with the rest of the world. This greatly underestimates Taiwan’s expectations for international space and is definitely not the objective of Taiwan’s diplomatic ceasefire.
If the KMT’s acceptance of the diplomatic ceasefire on the basis of the “one China” principle does not bring Taiwan WHA observer status, then it will have as little to show for its efforts as the DPP. One goal of such a ceasefire would be to gain WHA observer status, which would also be a way to explore possibilities for World Bank and IMF entry. The government can talk about a diplomatic ceasefire, but the more important challenge is to make the EU and other nations turn their support for Taiwan’s meaningful participation into support for full WHA membership, as is given by the US and Japan.
Lin Cheng-yi is a researcher at Academia Sinica’s Institute of European and American Studies.
TRANSLATED BY ANGELA HONG
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
Life as we know it will probably not come to an end in Japan this weekend, but what if it does? That is the question consuming a disaster-prone country ahead of a widely spread prediction of disaster that one comic book suggests would occur tomorrow. The Future I Saw, a manga by Ryo Tatsuki about her purported ability to see the future in dreams, was first published in 1999. It would have faded into obscurity, but for the mention of a tsunami and the cover that read “Major disaster in March 2011.” Years later, when the most powerful earthquake ever
RSS