Naive or stupid?
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is visiting China, where he plans to stay until Friday next week to pay respects to his ancestors around Tomb Sweeping Day. He is also leading a delegation of Taiwanese university students to carry out exchanges with their Chinese counterparts.
Ma’s office said the visit is non-political, as he would not visit Beijing and there would not be a second meeting between him and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). China’s Taiwan Affairs Office said it welcomes a visit by “Mr Ma” to fulfill a traditional Chinese custom, and promised to assist him if needed.
Meanwhile, the Presidential Office called on Ma to demonstrate Taiwan’s democratic freedoms, as well as the principles of “reciprocity and dignity” when engaging in cross-strait exchanges.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has also drawn the world’s attention to China’s threats against Taiwan. It is not a good time for a former Taiwanese president to visit China, which has repeatedly threatened Taiwan with military aggression. Although Ma’s visit is a “private and family” affair, it seriously damages Taiwan’s interests and public sentiment.
Even though Ma has been trying to keep a low-profile and make his visit non-political, is it possible to do so? Such wishful thinking indicates he is either naive or stupid. Once he steps on Chinese soil, how can he ask the Chinese government and media not to make a big deal out of his visit? Would they not seize on the opportunity to use Ma as a tool for their “united front” work? If Beijing sends high-ranking officials to meet with Ma, would he be able to refuse?
And when they address Ma as “Mr Ma” in public and brag about the so-called “1992 consensus” or unification between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, would Ma dare say that each side has its own interpretation what “one China” means or declare the existence of a free democratic country called the Republic of China? Would Ma condemn China for harassing Taiwan, and demand that dong so?
If Ma cannot meet these requirements, he should have canceled his visit to China.
Chi An-hsiu
Taipei
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
RSS