In 2011, Taiwan and Hong Kong reached an agreement that the nation’s representative office in Hong Kong should be named the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office, forgoing the sensitive terms “Taiwan” and “Republic of China (ROC)” to be able to exchange documents for the mutual benefit of Taiwan and Hong Kong, and to provide services to their citizens.
When the Hong Kong government made agreeing to the “one China” principle a condition for issuing work permits to Taiwanese staff at the office, it left the Mainland Affairs Council with no option but to refuse signing a document that belittles Taiwan’s national dignity.
The same thing has been going on in Hong Kong for a long time. Ever since Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) took office, Hong Kong’s communist government has taken a zero-sum approach to handling matters. For example, civil servants — who take neutral stances in their jobs — must swear allegiance to the territory’s government or lose their jobs.
The same approach is used against Hong Kong’s democratic alliance, Next Media and even banks and businesses; everyone is forced to choose between totalitarianism and democracy. Choosing democracy, of course, results in being punished by the Chinese Communist Party.
Over the past few months, all demonstrations and gatherings have been banned in Hong Kong, and freedom of expression has been restricted. Apart from showing that Hong Kong has turned deeply “red” and that any talk of Hong Kong enjoying “a high degree of freedom” is empty, these pathological methods have also cut off all communication channels between civil society and the government, and blocked every outlet for public anger.
The situation can only become increasingly polarized. As Hong Kongers who have not been able to emigrate are forced to choose between a life of slavery and revolution, brutal police suppression of public discontent and complaints only causes that discontent and those complaints to boil over again. When that happens, protests are no longer peaceful.
A gray area can provide flexibility when handling problems, and a space for communication and mediation. China does not understand the importance of this gray area. It treats everything as black or white, and even extends this dualistic approach to diplomacy.
Media have reported that China, in complete disregard of diplomatic protocol and international rules, has listed 14 complaints against Australia and threatened to treat the country as an enemy. Left with only two options — silently accept humiliation or strike back — Australia, of course, chose to make the issue public and strike back together with the G7 member states.
If China continues to handle issues by blocking every channel of communication, as well as every other possibility, the only option left to the world will, in the end, be war. Is this really what China wants?
Hong Tsun-ming is the director of the Taiwan Statebuilding Party’s Yilan County Branch.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS