Speaking at the Asia-Pacific Forward Forum in Taipei, former Singaporean minister for foreign affairs George Yeo (楊榮文) proposed a “Chinese commonwealth” as a potential framework for political integration between Taiwan and China. Yeo said the “status quo” in the Taiwan Strait is unsustainable and that Taiwan should not be “a piece on the chessboard” in a geopolitical game between China and the US.
Yeo’s remark is nothing but an ill-intentioned political maneuver that is made by all pro-China politicians in Singapore. Since when does a Southeast Asian nation have the right to stick its nose in where it is not wanted and make judgements on cross-strait relations?
Singapore’s first prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀), and former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) were on such cordial terms that Chiang signed an agreement called “Project Starlight,” allowing Singapore to dispatch troops to Taiwan for training. With that history in mind, perhaps Yeo thought he could “help” decide the fate of Taiwan by helping to spread Beijing’s propaganda.
Neither Taiwan nor China is made up of a single ethnic group. Terms such as “Zhonghua minzu” (中華民族, “Chinese nation”) or “Chinese people” were invented to support pro-unification ideology. Even in Singapore, only three-quarters of the population are considered “Chinese” or are the descendants of Chinese people.
Perhaps Yeo should first conduct a survey in Singapore by asking how many Singporeans are willing for Singapore to form a “Chinese commonwealth” with China. If the majority approved, Yeo could then sell the idea to Taiwan.
The UK and the US are democratic countries. Despite their shared language and history, and overlapping in religious beliefs and legal principles, as well as ties that reach back hundreds of years, they are close allies and independent entities that have each other’s backs. They are not a “commonwealth.”
In the case of China and Taiwan, anyone can see that the two have more differences than similarities, in terms of political systems, ideologies and values, not to mention distrust and no feelings of kinship. How could this become a “commonwealth”?
Beijing has always accused other nations of interfering in China’s internal affairs; why is it now being oddly silent about Yeo’s stupid remark?
Hung Yu-jui is a Japanese-language teacher and translator.
Translated by Rita Wang
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS