On Oct. 29, the Presidential Office announced that former vice president Lien Chan (連戰) would attend the 2008 APEC leaders summit on behalf of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九).
Lien will be the highest-ranking former Taiwanese official to attend the summit, and Ma’s government is pleased with the status of its envoy.
But the government seems unaware that the appointment of Lien could strengthen the belief the public has that Ma is ignorant of the seriousness of the global economic crisis, while also giving the international community the misconception that Taiwan endorses China’s “Anti-Secession” Law.
This financial crisis, which is the largest in a century, has greatly affected the world economy. Asia-Pacific countries that mainly rely on exports to the US and European markets are now facing outflow of foreign capital and declining exports, and that is in addition to the current crisis.
CHALLENGE
The challenge that these nations are facing, therefore, is much greater than that of the US and Europe, which are currently going through financial and monetary tightening.
Naturally, the APEC summit will focus on how to coordinate the economic strategies of the member states in order to overcome the international crisis.
So, surprisingly, the Ma government is sending Lien, who knows little about economics and who is controversial politically, to represent Taiwan.
In doing so, the government has entirely overlooked the strategic opportunity for this country to engage in economic talks involving a number of nations.
The decision also shows that Ma only cares about pushing forward his own “one China” policy.
IMPRESSION
As Ma’s government strives to improve cross-strait relations, the appointment of Lien, who endorses China’s Anti-Secession Law, could create an impression in the international community that the government endorses the law.
Little wonder, then, that Beijing rejected former Control Yuan president Fredrick Chien (錢復) as Taipei’s envoy, while giving Lien a big, warm welcome.
The reason for this is simple: The summit is one of the few international conferences that Taiwan is allowed to attend for its full duration.
By appointing a supporter of the Anti-Secession Law as Taiwan’s delegate, Ma will be able to instruct Lien to dance to China’s tune at the event.
At this event, one that is crucial to Taiwan’s sovereignty, Ma will be able to speak through Lien and directly act to deny Taiwan’s sovereignty, while also hushing the voices of other democratic nations that support Taiwan, such as the US and Japan.
GROUNDS
With Ma sending a supporter of the Anti-Secession Law to represent Taiwan in the international community, what grounds will other nations have to oppose the law?
If Ma is truly opposed to that law, as he has repeatedly claimed, he should have realized that sending a supporter of it could not only damage Taiwan’s sovereignty, but also hasten the “denationalization” of the country.
Ma’s government seems unaware of this issue, instead expressing pleasure at the high-ranking status of its envoy.
I fear, therefore, that the prediction now circulating that Taiwan will perish as a country within four years is not groundless.
Lai I-chung is an assistant professor at Mackay Medicine, Nursing and Management College.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS