Political bubbles burst when reality reveals that the situation is unsustainable. Willing European politicians, journalists and academics have lived in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) bubble describing Taiwan as Chinese, and have promoted closer ties between Taiwan and China.
This contributed to a perception that Taiwan was divided about its future international status and confused the European public.
This damaging export of division has almost stopped. Taiwan can now stand more united, but it needs to reach out to the European public to win over China.
The KMT’s political bubble burst due to political developments in Taiwan, including victories by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), the KMT’s election failures and the appearance of new parties, such as the Taiwan’s People’s Party, that might take voters from the KMT.
Today, the vast majority of the political parties in Taiwan and the general public consider Taiwan as a nation with its current borders. Consequently, divisions over Taiwan’s international status is diminishing and people can observe a stronger export of political unity.
Realities can be hard to swallow for the KMT, which appears to be awakening slowly from a kind of denial. Even this year, the KMT continues to celebrate China’s victory over Japan and talks about the Opium War in 1840.
Moreover, its positions on defending Taiwan are called into question when it attempts to block or delay budgets for new F-16 upgrades and other military spending. A slow awakening from an increased isolation might be seen in the relaxation of the so-called “1992 consensus,” which the KMT considered necessary due to misunderstandings between China and the ruling DPP.
Even in Europe, the KMT’s bubble is finding it more difficult to survive, with a new generation of journalists and politicians with no personal memories of cross-strait relations prior to 2000 questioning China.
They appear far more interested in Taiwan’s current affairs and the situation with China, and that 67 percent of the population consider themselves Taiwanese, compared with 2.4 percent who identify as Chinese.
However, Taiwan’s future is not safe. The reactions from the EU to Hong Kong came too slow and were weak.
Hong Kong and Taiwan have quite different histories when it comes to China, but Taiwan should be prepared for a similar silent reaction from the EU.
Unfortunately, this is happening already. China appears to be creating a new normal, allowing it to fly into Taiwan’s airspace with impunity.
The power of the EU is founded in the European countries, not in Brussels. Consequently, to increase Taiwan’s influence in the EU, it needs to invest far more economically in each European country. This would ensure an increased mutual interest, which has been directly encouraged by EU’s trade office in Taiwan.
Power also lies with the citizens of Europe. Taiwan can reach ordinary citizens by engaging even stronger with civil society groups across Europe in politics, art, sports, music and many other areas.
Taiwan representative offices can benefit from these civil society groups by promoting cooperation based on their own ideas or the ideas coming out of the passion and group dynamics among the members of the civil society groups.
Taiwan needs to reach out broadly to the European public and try new avenues to win over China. The consensus being created in Taiwan on the international status is a necessary starting point.
Michael Danielsen is the chairman of Taiwan Corner.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS