Last month, Taiwan’s decades-long diplomatic relationship with El Salvador came to an abrupt end. El Salvador understands the relationship between Taiwan’s status, China and the Republic of China (ROC) better than most countries.
Diplomatic relations were first established between the ROC and El Salvador in 1933, but at that time, Taiwan was not part of the ROC. In 1949, the ROC “government” occupied Taiwan, but had lost all its Chinese territory after losing the Chinese Civil War.
At the signing of the San Francisco Peace Treaty with Japan in 1951, El Salvador’s ambassador declared that his country accepted that Japan only relinquished its sovereignty over Taiwan and Penghu so that their sovereignty and political future could be wholly determined according to the principles of liberty and the free expression of its people.
The treaty has never been amended and is still a valid international agreement. Yet by establishing diplomatic relations with China and accepting Beijing’s “one China” principle, El Salvador has not only brushed aside Taiwan’s position as a democratic nation, it has also reneged on its promise and turned its back on democratic principles.
Taipei and Washington must issue the sternest possible response to El Savador’s pusillanimous betrayal.
On the surface, the government did issue a robust response by moving first to sever the diplomatic relationship and terminating all economic financial aid, but by emphasizing the 85-year-long diplomatic relationship between the two countries, the government simply exposed the fact that El Salvador broke off relations with the “ROC” rather than “Taiwan.”
Taiwan must build relationships with the international community by either rectifying the nation’s official name or clearly redefining the concept of the ROC.
Beijing’s latest overbearing suppression of Taiwan has elicited a rare reflex response from Washington.
A US Department of State spokesman said that the US was “deeply disappointed” by El Salvador’s decision, while a statement released by White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders spoke of the US’ “grave concern” over China’s “destabilization of the cross-strait relationship” and its “political interference in the western hemisphere.”
The statement also said that the Salvadorean government’s decision would result in a re-evaluation of the US’ relationship with El Salvador.
China’s poaching of El Salvador fits its pattern of hegemonic behavior and expansionism, encapsulated in its long-standing hunger to annex Taiwan. However, this time Beijing has thoroughly irritated Washington and prompted the US to draw a new diplomatic red line.
From Washington’s perspective, China’s aggressive behavior in Asia is one thing — and it has begun to push back against it — but if Beijing seeks to encroach upon the US’ sphere of influence in the western hemisphere, it will sow the seeds of its own destruction.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has sought to make hay over the government’s latest diplomatic setback, yet the real setback from this incident is to the bogus legal mandate of the ROC and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) regime.
Xi’s Belt and Road Initiative has been spurned by the US, while his country’s “peaceful rise” is being resisted both economically and militarily by the US.
Beijing’s purchase of El Salvador’s friendship could herald a turning point in Taiwan’s dealings with the outside world and the beginning of a genuine Taiwanese foreign diplomacy.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Edward Jones
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
As the highest elected official in the nation’s capital, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) is the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) candidate-in-waiting for a presidential bid. With the exception of Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕), Chiang is the most likely KMT figure to take over the mantle of the party leadership. All the other usual suspects, from Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) to New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) to KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) have already been rejected at the ballot box. Given such high expectations, Chiang should be demonstrating resolve, calm-headedness and political wisdom in how he faces tough
RSS