During former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing on Wednesday last week, Xi focused his speech on the theme of peace. He said that people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait should “work together to pursue a bright future for peaceful reunification,” adding that “all Chinese on both sides of the Strait are anticipating a peaceful home and harmonious family life. To achieve this, it is imperative to promote the peaceful development of cross-strait relations.”
It was the second meeting between Ma and Xi. In the 2015 exchange in Singapore, Xi took a tough stance, saying that, without the calming effect of the so-called “1992 consensus” and opposition to Taiwanese independence, the ship of peaceful development would run into fierce waves and could even capsize.
Comparing Xi’s previous speech with last week’s, Beijing’s attitude toward Taiwan appears to have gone through a stark turnaround from ferocity to benevolence.
The key factor behind this shift is the changing international situation.
First, US Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell, known as the “Asia czar” for formulating the Indo-Pacific strategy for the administration of US President Joe Biden, on April 5 said that the AUKUS trilateral security partnership between Australia, the UK and the US has a submarine plan that would help deter any potential action by China against Taiwan.
What that suggests is that as soon as China launches any attack or blockade against Taiwan, nuclear submarines operated by Australia under the auspices of AUKUS would take part in counteracting the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. Of course the US and UK, as close partners of Australia, would also act accordingly.
Second, on Monday last week, Japanese state broadcaster NHK interviewed US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan. When asked about the possibility of a “Taiwan contingency,” Sullivan said that “the entire thrust of our approach ... is to ensure that such a contingency never comes to pass.”
That interview preceded a summit meeting between Biden and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida in Washington on Wednesday last week, where the leaders reiterated the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, and said that cross-strait issues must be resolved peacefully.
Third, a bilateral summit between the US and Japan was followed on Thursday last week by a trilateral summit between the US, Japan and the Philippines. The countries’ leaders issued a “joint vision statement” in which they affirmed “the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait as an indispensable element of global security and prosperity.”
Within just a few days, the US, the UK, Australia, Japan and the Philippines have all “drawn their swords.” Through AUKUS, the US-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security and the US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty — which together constitute three layers of power in the Indo-Pacific regional security system — these nations have drawn a red line that China must not cross, namely that peace must be maintained in the Taiwan Strait.
Xi’s decision to wave the flag of peace does not necessarily mean that he has really laid down his sword. He might have just found it necessary to act this way under the current conditions. As for Ma’s wish to claim credit for himself, it is not even worth talking about.
Huang Wei-ping works in public service.
Translated by Julian Clegg
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS