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
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the
RSS