The National Policy Foundation, sponsored by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), recently held a forum called “The Effect on Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) Foreign Policy Toward Taiwan Following the Two Sessions.”
Chao Chun-shan (趙春山), a member of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) braintrust on cross-strait relations, used the forum to repeat KMT policy like a broken record, claiming that if put into office, the KMT would start “a new dialogue” with China.
He is naive to believe that reopening dialogue across the Taiwan Strait would revive the congenial relationship seen during Ma’s administration.
It would certainly not put an end to China’s air force incursions into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone. Unless Chao is suffering from serious memory loss, he is deceiving the public, because Chinese warplanes have been conducting long distance training exercises since 2013.
Chao is aware that the US would continue suppressing China, a change in international relations direction from Ma’s presidency. At this critical juncture, if Taiwan becomes ambiguous in its attitude toward China, it risks becoming the thorn in the side of democratic allies. Those who lack realistic views of international politics think that dialogue is the answer to every problem.
If that is the case, then there would have been no wars throughout history. The most famous dialogue in history is nothing but the Melian Dialogue, a dramatization of the negotiations between the Athenians and the Melians before the siege. The two parties failed to reach a consensus after the dialogue, and the Athenians wiped out the Melians.
In East Asian history, the last ruler of the Southern Tang Dynasty, Li Yu (李煜), thought that if he could appease the Song forces, then there would be peace for his country. As the Song armies prepared to invade, Li immediately asked to talk. Zhao Kuangyin (趙匡胤), who later became the founder of the Song dynasty, replied: “No more of this talk. As there is only one kingdom, I could not allow another to share it with me.”
The same example can be seen in modern history. Former British prime minister Neville Chamberlain thought that he could achieve “peace for our time” by talking to Adolf Hitler. Despite receiving a rowdy homecoming from the crowd after signing the Munich Agreement, Chamberlain’s talk failed to keep Hitler from invading Poland the following year, which led to World War II.
Former US president Bill Clinton also thought that the US could achieve peace with North Korea through dialogue. Unfortunately, this opened a can of worms for the US, for North Korea has learned that the US would capitulate whenever it throws a tantrum, providing further chances to extort aid from Washington.
The KMT should know this better than anyone since the it has fallen for CCP schemes after multiple negotiations and peace talks. Former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) blamed the US for the loss of the “mainland” because Washington forced him to negotiate with the CCP. He would turn in his grave if he knew that droves of KMT members were now in favor of holding peace talks.
KMT icon and Republic of China (ROC) founder Sun Yat-sen (孫逸仙) once discussed the futility of talk.
“To rely on benevolence alone to influence the Europeans in Asia to relinquish the privileges they have acquired in China would be an impossible dream,” he said.
Ironically, after the end of World War II, Europe relinquished many privileges acquired through treaties, including the handover of Hong Kong. Recent crackdowns and changes have proved that it was China that renounced its “50 years unchanged” pledge.
While history has shown that the US and Europe have been reliable, it is downright impossible and naive to negotiate with an autocratic country with a record of breaking promises.
Prior to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the US and Europe were making no progress with Russia. French President Emmanuel Macron thought that he could dissuade Russian President Vladimir Putin with his silver tongue. The joke was on Macron when Putin turned on him and ordered the invasion.
While Macron only suffered a bruised ego, Taiwan could easily lose its sovereignty and people.
In response to Chao’s preposterous stance, and to Ma — a former president who possesses the nation’s highest secrets and is about to visit China — Taiwanese should slam them for their quasi-treason and refrain from being deceived by these “pro-dialogue” advocates.
Tommy Lin is director of Wu Fu Eye Clinic and president of the Formosa Republican Association.
Translated by Rita Wang
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under