In the past few days, two high-ranking individuals — Tajinder Pal Singh Bagga, spokesman for India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party’s New Delhi branch, and SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk — have expressed very different attitudes toward Taiwan and China, and the relationship between them.
Bagga hung a banner celebrating Taiwan’s Double Ten National Day outside the Chinese embassy in the Indian capital on Monday, while in an interview with the Financial Times on Friday, Musk said that cross-strait tensions could be resolved by making Taiwan a “special administrative zone” of China.
It is not the first time Bagga has shown support for Taiwan. In 2020, he placed 100 signs bearing its national flag and the words: “Taiwan Happy National Day October 10” around the Chinese embassy. His actions were no prank; there was a serious intent and message behind them. Nor was he alone among his fellow Indians in holding this sentiment. Indian Internet users posted messages saying: “Happy Taiwan National Day” and “India stands together with Taiwan.”
The Indian news media, too, is aware of the distinction between Taiwan and China. Media executives were enraged when the Chinese embassy in New Delhi in 2020 issued what was essentially a diktat telling the media to observe and respect India’s official “one China” principle. The embassy’s audacity and presumptuousness had the opposite of its intended effect, as India’s media are free and independent.
Nor does Bagga stand alone among his political peers in his wariness of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Jawaharlal Nehru, Indian prime minister from 1950 to 1964, wanted to show good faith to the CCP when he advocated for the People’s Republic of China to replace Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) regime as China’s sole representative at the UN, but his enthusiasm was not shared by Indian lawmakers, and his dictum that “India and China are brothers” was shown for what it was by the 1962 Sino-Indian war. More recent events, such as the 2017 Doklam crisis, tensions along the Line of Actual Control in India’s eastern Ladakh and the CCP’s attempts to conceal the beginnings of the COVID-19 pandemic, have only hardened Indian politicians’ negative attitudes toward the CCP.
Like his peers and compatriots, Bagga knows the CCP and is aware of the menace it represents.
Musk has his sights set elsewhere. He is smart, resourceful and capable, and yet what he said about Taiwan makes him come across as, if not unthinking, then remarkably callous.
It is arguable that his suggestion makes rational sense — in the coldest way conceivable — but at the same time it is out of touch with the boundaries in which it must be made — geopolitical, moral, legal, humane, realistic, compassionate — that one has to wonder where the idea originated, because it was not solely born of a reasonable attempt at finding a solution, and it is utterly devoid of regard for the future of the international world order.
It only makes sense if you believe that Musk is firmly in Beijing’s pocket. Musk’s Tesla operations produce high volumes of its electric vehicles in its Shanghai Gigafactory, and China represents a major market for the company. Meanwhile, the CCP’s modus operandi is luring in foreign investment and then turning the screws to extract favors.
Predictably well received by Chinese Ambassador to the US Qin Gang (秦剛) and roundly rejected by politicians in Taiwan, Musk’s suggestion certainly resonates with the CCP’s narrative. It remains to be seen which other ways the CCP might ask Musk to bend to keep his operations in China running smoothly. He might even find keeping Twitter, should he finally close the acquisition deal, a free and open platform for the exchange of ideas an impossible endeavor. The CCP has strong feelings against unfettered freedom of expression.
A recent report concerning a student who is suing his teacher posed the question in its headline: Does failing a student in two subjects constitute bullying? The college student in Chiayi County apparently sought NT$2 million (US$63,603) in state compensation, but a court dismissed the case. The first reaction of many might have been to ask: What has happened to students nowadays? Some say that teachers have lost their authority, while others say students are overindulged. Some even start reminiscing over the days when “whatever the teacher says goes.” However, the real issue might be overlooked if emotional reactions like that are the
When I visited Taiwan last summer, I called on the nation to use its status as a technology superpower to build superweapons. It is obvious to me as I return a year later that Taiwan is now answering that call. By 2030, Taiwan envisions a domestic drone hub, capable of producing large quantities of drones per year. The nation continues to tighten cooperation across the private sector, scientific researchers and the elected government, on creating new and innovative production avenues for defense, while efforts to become central to the “democratic supply chain” are only increasing. Anduril is seeing all of these positive
Singaporean former Prime Minister and current senior minister Lee Hsien- Loong(李顯龍) last month stood on Chinese soil and told Beijing that Singapore cooperates because of “shared interests”, not because of common “ethnic descent,” a significant statement that has upended China’s cognitive warfare tactics of “ethnic nationalism.” Along with using its military buildup and economic growth to expand its international dominance, China has long deployed ethnic politics to promote the idea that all ethnic Chinese around the world, regardless of citizenship, share a tight bond with the Chinese motherland, by which it means the regime of the People’s Republic of China (PRC)
President William Lai Ching-te’s (賴清德) May 20 second-anniversary address was not just a routine policy review; it was damage control. US President Donald Trump’s remarks — that he did not want to see anyone move toward independence and that the delivery of a major Taiwan arms package could depend on the progress of US-China relations — unsettled Taiwan’s public and created an opening for opposition parties to question whether Taiwan was being treated as a bargaining chip in Washington’s dealings with Beijing. Lai’s speech was designed to close that opening. The address covered the expected ground: sovereignty, cross-strait relations, defense spending,