Mainland Affairs Council Minister Chen Ming-tong (陳明通) again caused a stir after an interview published on Monday by the Chinese-language Liberty Times (the sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) quoted him as saying that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait could forge official ties patterned after the EU model, or a pact between independent nations, or a “nations of brotherhood” (兄弟之邦).
Not surprisingly, Chen, an outspoken advocate of Taiwanese independence, was grilled by lawmakers across party lines about his remarks, which he sought to clarify by saying that they did not represent the government’s official stance.
Before dismissing Chen’s remarks, it should be noted that those ideas have been raised before by other well-known Taiwanese independence advocates. For example, Taiwan New Constitution Foundation founder Koo Kwang-ming (辜寬敏) in 2016 touted the idea of a nations of brotherhood serving as a foundation for cross-strait ties.
For two nations to establish some kind of formal ties, they first must be two sovereign, independent states. While China refuses to acknowledge that Taiwan is an independent nation, that does not mean Taiwan should play by its rules.
They must be, in a word, equals — a notion that might have a parallel in some of former premier William Lai’s (賴清德) remarks.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers in September 2017 questioned then-premier Lai about his statement that he is a “political worker who advocates Taiwanese independence,” which they said contradicted his statement that the government should “show an affinity toward China while loving Taiwan.”
Lai said the two statements were not contradictory, as showing an affinity toward China while loving Taiwan means extending the nation’s friendliness to China in a “Taiwan-centric” way.
“Taiwan is already an independent nation. Its official title is the Republic of China. There is no need to declare independence,” Lai said at the time.
Now, when Taiwan and the US are celebrating the 40th anniversary of the US’ Taiwan Relations Act, and China has increased its military posturing, it is unlikely that the government would attempt any rash move aimed at declaring independence.
However, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government could draft a motion — a political agreement, which was the subject matter of the Liberty Times interview — by pursuing diplomatic ties with and thereby extending a hand of friendship toward China.
The government could work toward this goal with patience and persistence, even if it encounters setbacks, as there is no shame in trying to resolve the standoff, revive cross-strait ties, improve trade and tourism, and promote peace and security — as the government pledged in its comments about its role in Washington’s Indo-Pacific Strategy.
At the same time, it should continue to defend the nation’s sovereignty and dignity, push policies to uphold information security, counter disinformation originating in China, as well as develop and bolster the nation’s defense capabilities. It should not and does not have to sacrifice anything it is doing to keep Tawan a free and democratic nation.
This would benefit the nation by showing the world China’s true colors, enabling people to see more clearly than ever who has been refusing dialogue all these years, and who has been viciously and willfully restricting Taiwan’s international space by ostracizing it in international organizations and sidelining it at international events.
It would show the world who the troublemaker in the Strait is, and who has been encircling Taiwan with its military planes and breaching its airspace.
But what if Beijing does not approve?
That should not stop Taiwan, as China’s equal, from promoting its policies.
As the Soviet Union was collapsing in the late 1980s and Russia seemed to be starting the process of democratization, 36-year-old US academic Francis Fukuyama had the audacity to assert that the world was at the “end of history.” Fukuyama claimed that democratic systems would become the norm, and peace would prevail the world over. He published a grandiose essay, “The End of History?” in the summer 1989 edition of the journal National Interest. Overnight, Fukuyama became a famous theorist in the US, western Europe, Japan and even Taiwan. Did the collapse of the Soviet Union mark the end of an era as
During a news conference with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida in Tokyo on Monday, US President Joe Biden for the third time intimated that the US would take direct military action to defend Taiwan should China attack. Responding to a question from a reporter — Would Washington be willing to get involved militarily to defend Taiwan? — Biden replied with an unequivocal “Yes.” As per Biden’s previous deviations from the script of the US’ longstanding policy of “strategic ambiguity” — maintaining a deliberately nebulous position over whether the US would intervene militarily in the event of a conflagration between Taiwan and
Will the US come to the defense of Taiwan if and when China makes its move? Like most friends of Taiwan, I’ve been saying “yes” for a couple decades. But the truth is that none of us, in or out of government, really know. This is precisely why we all need to show humility in our advice on how Taiwan should prepare itself for such an eventuality. After all, it’s their country, and they have no choice but to live with the consequences. A couple weeks ago the New York Times published an article that put this reality in stark relief. As
US President Joe Biden has done it again — for the third time in the past nine months he has stated that the US will defend Taiwan. And for the third time, his administration officials have rushed to “clarify” that US policy toward Taiwan “has not changed” and Washington still follows its “one China policy.” That is the same scenario that played out with two other presidents. When asked the question posed to Biden in 2001, then-US president George W. Bush said Washington would do “whatever it took” to defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression. In 2020, then-US president Donald Trump