Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) over the weekend said the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) was “extending” domestic politics abroad by sending a delegation headed by King Pu-tsung (金溥聰), executive director of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) re-election campaign, to the US just days ahead of her long-planned trip.
While Tsai’s assessment of King’s visit was likely right on target, it nevertheless came across as somewhat childish. Yes, as the party in power, the KMT could send delegations to the US any time of the year, and yes, the timing of King’s visit is conspicuous. That being said, there is no rule that says the KMT cannot send a delegation abroad whenever DPP officials embark on a foreign trip.
Both Tsai and King, certainly not by coincidence, are scheduled to give speeches at Harvard University on Thursday. Rather than engage in recriminations and conspiracy theories, the DPP presidential candidate should instead use King’s presence to contrast her policies with those of Ma.
Her main task while in the US should not be to disparage the KMT for trying to “undermine” her visit — rhetoric that is certain to have little appeal with Taiwanese-Americans and potential supporters in academia — but rather to prove to an audience that may be a little skeptical that a new DPP administration would be one that Washington could work with.
There is no doubt that Tsai’s party has an image handicap overseas, mostly the result of the previous DPP administration’s less-than-stellar track record and, even more importantly, a sustained propaganda campaign in the media — both in Taiwan and abroad — that tends to favor the KMT.
Tsai now has a golden opportunity to allay fears that an “irrational” DPP would spark armed conflict in the Taiwan Strait and show the world that under her guidance, the party would not only avoid past mistakes, but is in fact better equipped to protect the rights and interests of Taiwanese.
Of course, such convincing is easier said than done, and Tsai will need to summon all her oratorical skills to present a platform that consists of more than sloganeering. There is a desire among many US officials and academics to work with Tsai for the benefit of a free Taiwan, but that will is oftentimes constrained by the great uncertainty surrounding her policies.
Defense — a key aspect of the US-Taiwan relationship — is an area where Tsai’s camp has yet to provide clear and reassuring leadership. Here is a chance for her, while in the US, to show that she would be a strong commander-in-chief where her predecessor, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), was perceived as weak by the armed forces, and suffered as a result.
Tsai should use this opportunity to demonstrate that her party has a “Plan B” for Oct. 2, the day after US President Barack Obama’s administration announces its final decision on the proposed F-16 sale to Taiwan. While the Ma administration, the KMT and the Ministry of National Defense have all failed to come up with alternatives should the F-16C/D sale be denied — a likely scenario — Tsai should be heading to the US with a list of alternatives and prescriptions.
Whether she has those remains to be seen, but one thing is sure: Engaging in mudslinging with King on US soil, and thereby extending domestic politics abroad, will not win her points — not at home and certainly not in the US.
Despite the complicated legacy of colonialism, relations between Taipei and Tokyo continue to blossom in these troubled times. As East Asia continues to battle the COVID-19 pandemic and struggles to contain an increasingly aggressive China, our democratic archipelago benefits from a new high in its security relations with Japan. Remarkably, with its generous vaccine diplomacy and the unprecedented explicit mention of the situation surrounding Taiwan in Japan’s annual defense white paper, Tokyo began to embrace a novel, two-track, comprehensive approach for engaging Taiwan. The first track deals with non-traditional security such as public health and vaccine donations. Japan has generously supported
As the incursions by China into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone intensify, the international community’s anxiety has risen over the question of whether the US military would become directly involved in the case of an attack on Taiwan. Washington’s long-held policy of “strategic ambiguity” does little to ease the trepidation. The rationale universally espoused on “strategic ambiguity” is that an announced commitment from Washington to directly defend Taiwan would encourage Taiwanese independence and consequently bring forth a Chinese military attack and a possible nuclear confrontation between two superpowers. However, this line of argument could soon lose steam if the subject is viewed from
Having deceived the world about its nuclear capabilities while preparing for an arms race, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is now using its increasing nuclear forces for virtual nuclear coercion. This new threat will continue until the United States, Japan, and Taiwan can restore the CCP’s sense of fear. This dynamic is a familiar one for Taiwan. As the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) capabilities have grown, its inhibitions about conducting larger and more frequent coercive military demonstrations have shrunk. The PLA now more openly practices for the destruction of Taiwan’s democracy and the murder of its citizens. In the nuclear realm,
In an unprecedented move, a group of democratic nations led by the US, UK and EU in a joint statement on Tuesday accused the Chinese Ministry of State Security of having carried out a major cyberattack earlier this year and stealing data from at least 30,000 organizations worldwide, including governments, universities and firms in key industries. Western officials were reportedly perplexed by the attack’s brazen execution and unparalleled scale. In an article on the attack, BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera wrote: “Western spies are still struggling to understand why Chinese behavior has changed.” The attack raises the fear “that they [China]