Diplomats should defend national interests. In terms of strategy, Representative to Japan Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) and Representative to the US Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) embody two diametrically opposed approaches.
Hsieh’s comments about Japan’s plan to discharge treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant into the ocean sparked unnecessary controversy, conveying a “wolf warrior” style of diplomacy — although he did not attack foreign targets, but domestic opponents.
Although Hsieh expressed the governemt’s concern about the wastewater to Japanese officials, he on April 9 wrote on Facebook that Taiwan’s nuclear power plants also discharged “untreated” wastewater into the ocean, causing harm to sealife. After his claims were challenged, Hsieh, a former lawmaker of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), revised his post and added documents that he thought would prove his point, while lashing out at those from the pan-blue camp who had criticized him.
The accusations from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers who called Hsieh a “traitor” might not be substantiated, but his comments invite the question of whether he is acting appropriately as a diplomat or whether his behavior rather resembles that of a bellicose TV show guest.
Most Taiwanese scientists are reticent about the sensitive nuclear wastewater issue, and the Atomic Energy Council (AEC), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Presidential Office have been busy putting out the flames fanned by Hsieh.
After local media reported that the AEC rebuffed Hsieh’s claims, the Presidential Office on Tuesday came out in his defense, arguing that the envoy’s and the agency’s remarks were not contradictory.
Under the KMT’s incessant attacks, the Presidential Office on Friday issued another statement to defend Hsieh, reiterating that he had expressed Taiwan’s concern about the plan to Japanese officials. The statement also restated that the government would monitor Japan’s wastewater disposal and called on the KMT not to stir conflict at a time when relations with Tokyo are improving.
Hsieh is still influential in the DPP, and this might be the reason he has been in office for five years — longer than many of his predecessors, who have typically left the post after four years.
Some commentators have said that Hsieh can only remain in office because Taiwan-Japan ties are sound — and because it keeps Hsieh busy, as he would otherwise meddle in domestic politics and cause more headaches for President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文).
However, as Taiwan-Japan relations might be entering a decisive stage, with Tokyo appearing more willing to adopt a position of “strategic clarity” toward Taiwan under Washington’s lead, Tsai should consider to what extent the approach taken by Hsieh — who for example called for joint military exercises between Taiwan, Japan and the US — advances the interests Taiwan shares with other nations.
By comparison, Hsiao, who also was a lawmaker, has proved herself better adapted to be a diplomat.
Facing another difficult situation — the one caused by the government’s lifting of a ban on the importation of pork products containing traces of ractopamine — Hsiao relayed the US’ concerns about a KMT referendum proposal that seeks to reinstate the ban, while also expressing Taiwan’s concerns about pork products from the US.
When KMT lawmakers speculated that Hsiao would be denied entry to US President Joe Biden’s swearing-in ceremony on Jan. 20, she brushed off their remarks and scored beautifully with a last-minute announcement that she would attend the event.
It is unsurprising that the foreign ministry on Facebook referred to Hsiao’s approach as “cat warrior” diplomacy, posting an image of what it called a “Taiwan diplocat.”
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with