The annual APEC meeting is one of the few international fora that Taiwan can actually participate in. However, this year things were different. During the meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) representative, former vice president Vincent Siew (蕭萬長), the latter suggested that the premise of the so-called “1992 consensus” remained unchanged, while Xi reiterated that his opposition to Taiwanese independence was still intact.
Over the course of the conference, when Siew held meetings with representatives of other nations, he conducted these as bilateral meetings on the sidelines, too, as if the decision had been made to keep things as low-key as possible. When he returns to Taiwan, Siew should perhaps explain why he decided to emasculate the nation’s dignity in this way, and what considerations informed this decision.
This might just have been Ma’s special envoy’s cautiousness and his willingness to belittle himself. Meanwhile, Xi displayed his usual swagger and authority. He made certain concessions on items that had stalled China-South Korea free-trade agreement (FTA) talks during a meeting with South Korean President Park Geun-hye to bring the negotiations to a more speedy conclusion. He spoke to Hong Kong Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying (梁振英) about the imminent launch of the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect scheduled for Monday, which the pro-democracy “Umbrella movement” had threatened to throw into chaos. In addition, the People’s Bank of China announced that it had signed a memorandum of understanding on Chinese yuan clearing arrangements with Bank Negara Malaysia, Malaysia’s central bank. For the Ma administration, which is keen to realize economic cooperation agreements with China, all of this activity must surely come as a slap in the face and an admonishment.
This was an opportunity for the government to evaluate its China policy and cross-strait economic relations, but all that happened was Minister of Economic Affairs Woody Duh (杜紫軍) talked, from the start, about how a third of all the nation’s exports to China are to be affected, and that a quarter would be at risk, if the cross-strait agreements the government wants passed are blocked in the legislature. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) central leadership jumped on this as good campaign material, lambasting opposition parties for delaying or blocking the passage of agreements, and saying that those parties were the main culprits behind the nation’s travails.
This type of irresponsible behavior reminds people that the thing which affects domestic exports is goods trade agreements, and if these are such a priority, then what is the Ministry of Economic Affairs doing? Where is the government going so wrong with first the cross-strait service trade agreement and the cross-strait trade in goods agreement? There is no real disagreement with South Korea over Park’s policies, so why is it that Ma has the entire domestic services industry up in arms over his policy, with people perceiving it almost universally as an existential threat, one which they feel they must oppose and protest against? The government even attempted to violate the democratic process, trying to force the agreement through the legislature in a move that ultimately led to the outbreak of the student-led Sunflower movement.
The lead-up to the APEC meeting was overshadowed by the “will he? won’t he?” fuss over whether Ma would get to meet Xi, and this took away from preparations for how Taiwan could exploit participation in this international forum to express what the nation has to offer. It was obvious that Beijing would not make things easy for Taiwan.
The Xinhua news agency intentionally obscured the status of the special envoy, referring to Siew as the honorary president of the “Cross-Straits Common Market Foundation,” who was received by Xi in the latter’s capacity as the general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and putting Siew together with Leung, even placing Taiwan behind Hong Kong. The National Security Council ought to have been prepared for how to deal with eventualities such as these, but as it was, the Taiwanese contingent was at a loss over how to respond, and could only swallow its pride and bear the indignation of the rebuff. It was like the KMT had already given up on pretending the Republic of China still exists.
The Ma administration is putting national sovereignty to the side and allowing the Xi government to divest Taiwan of its sovereign status, in the mistaken belief that China would give it special treatment in economics and trade and consolidate contact between the two governments. However, Xi preferred to offer concessions to South Korea to get everything sewn up with their trade deal. Yet with Taiwan, Beijing has consistently tried to entice the nation with promises of bountiful rewards in what seem like peaceful and generous overtures, getting Taiwan to commit to what is essentially a trap before it goes in for the kill. Beijing’s idea of “peaceful unification” is a perfect example. As for Ma, who is constantly throwing good money after bad, how can he sleep at night, with what he is doing to the nation and to Taiwanese?
Ever since Taiwan joined APEC in 1991, required to participate under the name Chinese Taipei, not a day has gone by in which Beijing has not exerted some kind of pressure. Taiwan’s leaders have all had to participate strictly in informal leaders’ meetings. The Taiwanese understand this practical restriction, and so have not harangued the succession of governments presiding over this period to change the political situation.
However, they do ask that the government can bring up, during the course of negotiations, the special contribution Taiwan has made, or to reflect this in the agenda when the nation’s officials participate in these events, and that these officials express Taiwan’s desire to engage in international exchanges. The “1992 consensus” and “opposing Taiwanese independence” are not on the APEC agenda. Siew has said that he is fulfilling the remit given to him by Ma, but it is a remit for which there is no consensus in Taiwan. Ma’s betrayal of the Taiwanese is quite unconscionable.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Taiwan’s victory in the World Baseball Softball Confederation Premier12 championship is an historic achievement. Yet once again this achievement is marred by the indignity of the imposed moniker “Chinese Taipei.” The absurdity is compounded by the fact that none of the players are even from Taipei, and some, such as Paiwan catcher Giljegiljaw Kungkuan, are not even ethnically Chinese. The issue garnered attention around the Paris Olympics, yet fell off the agenda as Olympic memories retreated. “Chinese Taipei” persists, and the baseball championship serves as a reminder that fighting “Chinese Taipei” must be a continuous campaign, not merely resurfacing around international
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) appears to be encountering some culture shock and safety issues at its new fab in Arizona. On Nov. 7, Arizona state authorities cited TSMC for worker safety violations, fining the company US$16,131, after a man died in May. The Arizona Division of Occupational Safety and Health released its six-month investigation into the fatality and cited TSMC for failing to keep the workplace free from hazards likely to cause death or serious harm. At about the same time, the chip giant was also sued for alleged discriminatory hiring practices favoring Asians, prompting a flurry of debate on whether TSMC’s
This month, the National Health Insurance (NHI) is to implement a major policy change by eliminating the suspension-and-resumption mechanism for Taiwanese residing abroad. With more than 210,000 Taiwanese living overseas — many with greater financial means than those in Taiwan — this reform, catalyzed by a 2022 Constitutional Court ruling, underscores the importance of fairness, sustainability and shared responsibility in one of the world’s most admired public healthcare systems. Beyond legal obligations, expatriates have a compelling moral duty to contribute, recognizing their stake in a system that embodies the principle of health as a human right. The ruling declared the prior
US president-elect Donald Trump is inheriting from President Joe Biden a challenging situation for American policy in the Indo-Pacific region, with an expansionist China on the march and threatening to incorporate Taiwan, by force if necessary. US policy choices have become increasingly difficult, in part because Biden’s policy of engagement with China, including investing in personal diplomacy with President Xi Jinping (習近平), has not only yielded little but also allowed the Chinese military to gain a stronger footing in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait. In Xi’s Nov. 16 Lima meeting with a diminished Biden, the Chinese strongman signaled little
RSS