Xinhua news agency on Tuesday published a summary of the key positions of US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) from their meeting on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Indonesia.
Unsurprisingly, the article identified the issue of Taiwan as the first “red line that cannot be crossed” in US-Sino relations.
It quoted Xi as saying that Biden has repeatedly said he does not support Taiwanese independence, and that he has no intention of using Taiwan to seek a competitive advantage over China or to contain Beijing.
The article concludes by expressing the hope that Xi “will implement his promises” to put Biden in his place.
However, most interesting about this representation is how it shines a light on the differences between how the US and China view “Taiwanese independence.”
On Nov. 3, during a trip to Palau, Vice President William Lai (賴清德) said that China equates not supporting unification with supporting independence, whereas the US interprets Taiwanese independence as participating in processes legally inferring independence.
When Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) participated in a videoconference, in her capacity as president of the Republic of China, at the George W. Bush Presidential Center on Wednesday, would this be considered as inferring independence? Was allowing Tsai to attend the conference stepping over the “red line that cannot be crossed”? Herein lies the confusion between the two interpretations.
In his poem Written on the Wall of West Forest Temple (題西林壁), Song Dynasty official Su Shi (蘇軾) wrote: “When you look across, it is a mountain range, when you look up, it is a peak, always changing, depending on where you stand, near or far.”
After a century of struggle, the world is paying attention to the Taiwanese independence movement. Now, caught in the political struggle between two major global powers, one has to ask what independence looks like for this small nation?
Perhaps the time has finally come when Taiwanese should give this question serious consideration. It is a matter of crucial importance to peace in East Asia.
Shih Ya-hsuan is an associate professor in National Kaohsiung Normal University’s Department of Geography.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS