Broadening our support base
The contrast could not be starker: During Helsinki Design Week, temporary housing built by refugees using a design by Taiwanese architect Hsieh Ying-chun (謝英俊) was opened on Sept. 15. Lawmakers from the Green Party, the Left Alliance and the Swedish People’s Party participated in the event.
Three weeks later, a reception hosted by Taiwan’s diplomatic mission was also attended by lawmakers, but this time from the Center Party, the National Coalition Party and the so-called Finns Party.
While I appreciate the interest in Taiwan from both the liberal-left and the center-right, I am puzzled why there was no overlap: particularly why no one from the left attended the diplomatic reception. Maybe this is too small a sample from which to extrapolate, but it is hardly pure coincidence.
During the Cold War, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government fostered relations with right-wing contacts through the World Anti-Communist League and the International Democrat Union. The KMT saw the political left worldwide as fellow-travelers of communists and treated them with suspicion.
However, Taiwan is no longer under the KMT regime. Instead, it has a new source of legitimacy — that of popular suffrage and electoral democracy. As a vibrant democracy with a strong civil society, Taiwan needs the widest possible support from across the political spectrum globally.
The Taiwanese deserve the sympathy of politicians of all ideological hues who support governance by the ballot box.
Should not the Democratic Progressive Party administration reach out to friends in left-liberal parties, to lay the groundwork for further participation in the international community?
There is certainly interest in Taiwan from such politicians, too: This is evidenced by their participation at Hsieh’s event. They will not shy away from getting involved if Taiwan’s case is skillfully explained to them.
Thankfully, the civil society and Taiwan’s expatriate communities are already steps ahead of the government. Organizations such as the Formosan Association for Public Affairs in North America and Taiwan Corner in Europe have years of networking and lobbying experience ready for Taiwan’s diplomats to tap into.
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and Premier William Lai (賴清德) simply have to reorient the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and broaden the perspective of the diplomatic service.
Te Khai-su
Helsinki, Finland
In a stark reminder of China’s persistent territorial overreach, Pema Wangjom Thongdok, a woman from Arunachal Pradesh holding an Indian passport, was detained for 18 hours at Shanghai Pudong Airport on Nov. 24 last year. Chinese immigration officials allegedly informed her that her passport was “invalid” because she was “Chinese,” refusing to recognize her Indian citizenship and claiming Arunachal Pradesh as part of South Tibet. Officials had insisted that Thongdok, an Indian-origin UK resident traveling for a conference, was not Indian despite her valid documents. India lodged a strong diplomatic protest, summoning the Chinese charge d’affaires in Delhi and demanding
With the Year of the Snake reaching its conclusion on Monday next week, now is an opportune moment to reflect on the past year — a year marked by institutional strain and national resilience. For Taiwan, the Year of the Snake was a composite of political friction, economic momentum, social unease and strategic consolidation. In the political sphere, it was defined less by legislative productivity and more by partisan confrontation. The mass recall movement sought to remove 31 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators following the passage of controversial bills that expanded legislative powers and imposed sweeping budget cuts. While the effort
The wrap-up press event on Feb. 1 for the new local period suspense film Murder of the Century (世紀血案), adapted from the true story of the Lin family murders (林家血案) in 1980, has sparked waves of condemnation in the past week, as well as a boycott. The film is based on the shocking, unsolved murders that occurred at then-imprisoned provincial councilor and democracy advocate Lin I-hsiung’s (林義雄) residence on Feb. 28, 1980, while Lin was detained for his participation in the Formosa Incident, in which police and protesters clashed during a pro-democracy rally in Kaohsiung organized by Formosa Magazine on Dec.
When Hong Kong’s High Court sentenced newspaper owner Jimmy Lai (黎智英) to 20 years in prison this week, officials declared that his “heinous crimes” had long poisoned society and that his punishment represented justice restored. In their telling, Lai is the mastermind of Hong Kong’s unrest — the architect of a vast conspiracy that manipulated an otherwise contented population into defiance. They imply that removing him would lead to the return of stability. It is a politically convenient narrative — and a profoundly false one. Lai did not radicalize Hong Kong. He belonged to the same generation that fled from the Chinese
RSS