President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has said several times that he believes Taiwan’s democracy can act as a positive example for China and that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) will only consider unification if and when Beijing embraces universal suffrage.
Ma’s theory is not unique. It is almost identical to that of the US government, which for many years has trumpeted its policy of engagement with Beijing as a way of changing China’s authoritarian system, leading to its eventual democratization.
But were it to be ranked on its effectiveness so far, the US policy would most definitely receive a failing grade.
Thirty years of foreign investment-fueled economic growth has only succeeded in strengthening the position of China’s leaders, making them more belligerent, while democracy seems further away now than at any point since the Cultural Revolution.
The utter failure of the US’ policy was apparent during US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s February visit to Beijing, when she said issues such as human rights couldn’t be allowed to “interfere” with the tackling of economic problems.
Clinton’s reluctance to bring up issues unpalatable to Chinese leaders seems to indicate that instead of changing China, engagement has produced the opposite effect.
With its growing economic clout, China now has the ability to influence those who choose to have closer ties with it — including the world’s sole remaining superpower.
This is a lesson that people in Taiwan are only now beginning to learn.
The latest apparent sign of this phenomenon came earlier this week when Chinese dissident Ji Xiaofeng (紀曉峰) accused Taiwanese intelligence agencies — in behavior reminiscent of their Chinese counterparts — of collecting information on Xinjiang and Tibet independence activists with a view to preventing them from entering Taiwan.
The report was rebutted by the agencies concerned, but it would be foolish to assume that the Ma government is incapable of such behavior given its track record — and political agenda.
The effects of Ma’s policy of snuggling up to China were brought into sharp focus in December by his rejection of a possible visit to Taiwan by the Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama, something he had welcomed just nine months earlier.
This came just a month after November’s visit by Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), during which police confiscated national flags and used violence against unarmed protesters.
Add to that news that Taiwan is no longer ranked as Asia’s freest press: The US-based Freedom House’s recent annual freedom of the press survey saw Taiwan’s ranking slip 11 spots to 43rd place from last year, which makes it clear which side of the Taiwan Strait is having the bigger effect on the other.
If a country as powerful as the US has, to all intents and purposes, admitted defeat in its attempts to influence China, it does not take a genius to work out what the consequences will be for Taiwan with the Ma administration’s accelerating rapprochement.
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to