The results of Saturday’s local elections reflect mainstream public opinion in Taiwan, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office spokeswoman Zhu Fenglian (朱鳳蓮) said. The Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) resounding defeat showed that Taiwanese are hoping for peace, stability and a good life, Zhu said, following the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) policy of using Taiwan’s democracy to isolate and damage the DPP, which Beijing regards as a band of “secessionists.” She said the DPP’s pro-US stance and its emphasis on protecting Taiwan’s sovereignty — positions Beijing says have contributed to increased cross-strait tensions — were the reasons for the party’s electoral drubbing.
Unlike general elections, which focus on national matters, local elections are concerned with local issues, such as COVID-19 prevention measures put in place by the DPP-led government, which might have motivated people to vote for the candidates of other parties. The DPP’s defeat is an indication of democratic sophistication and shows that Taiwanese are able to compartmentalize with great clarity. This is why few pundits are suggesting that the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) victory on Saturday necessarily means that it will be plain sailing for the KMT in the 2024 presidential election, when voters once more turn their attention to national security issues.
The first question that arises from Zhu’s comment is why cross-strait peace is threatened in the first place. Who is placing stability across the Taiwan Strait at risk? A governing party focused on protecting the nation should not be a contentious issue in an election at any level.
The second question concerns the alternative she is presumably alluding to: that Taiwan would be better off under CCP control.
Chinese who are taking to the streets over the past few days give a resounding answer to that question. A blaze in Xinjiang’s Urumqi on Thursday last week that killed a number of people that to this day remains undisclosed — because the CCP prefers not to let that information be known — sparked a wave of protests throughout the country against Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) “zero COVID-19” policy, as residents of the burning building were reportedly prevented from leaving because the area was under a lockdown order. Originally an expression of outrage over the needless deaths, the protests quickly became an outlet of frustration over months of restrictions that have disrupted people’s lives, led to their businesses failing, led to them being locked up in their apartments for long periods and their loved ones dying due to a lack of access to medicines.
Footage that has found its way out of China shows people calling for freedom and for Xi to step down. As much as the footage has astonished China observers, it must have also alarmed the CCP leadership.
Ask regular Chinese what they think about the “good life” and their own government’s handling of the pandemic, but do not ask Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Zhao Lijian (趙立堅), whose silence in response to a Reuters journalist asking for a comment on the protests was deafening. Zhao eventually gave a practiced denial that the protests are happening at all.
Police have broken up the protests and erected barriers to ensure they do not happen again. They have approached pedestrians and searched their smartphones for footage of the protests, and instructed them to delete messaging apps such as Telegram.
China experts and Chinese exiles, such as artist Ai Weiwei (艾未未), have said they do not believe the protests will bring down the CCP, as Xi’s grip on power is too strong.
Even if this fire is put out, Xi will know that people’s frustration and anger will continue to smolder. Chinese, too, hope for peace, stability and a good life.
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath