President William Lai (賴清德) on Wednesday proposed talks with Beijing to ease restrictions on Chinese visiting Taiwan, the Central News Agency wrote.
Lai said that while more than 2 million Taiwanese had visited China last year, fewer than 300,000 Chinese had visited Taiwan, and called China “the real barrier to cross-strait exchanges.”
“If China is genuinely sincere, I suggest that the Taiwan Strait Tourism Association and the Association for Tourism Exchange across the Taiwan Straits begin negotiations [to ease restrictions],” Lai said.
Naturally, there is no possibility that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) would engage in talks with Lai or any other member of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Doing so would be contradictory to the CCP’s public discourse on the DPP, which it depicts as a promoter of Taiwanese independence and consequently as an enemy of the Chinese people.
To be fair, this mindset is apt in the case of Lai, who has publicly referred to himself as a “pragmatic worker for Taiwan independence.” As recently as Oct. 11 last year, China’s state-backed Global Times quoted Lai as saying as much, and called him a “pragmatic war instigator.”
Since taking office, Lai has not called for changes to Taiwan’s Constitution to enshrine its independence, but he has reiterated an earlier statement by former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) about neither side of the Strait being subordinate to each other.
Lai and Tsai have also on different occasions said that formal declarations of Taiwan’s independence are unnecessary, since Taiwan is already independent. All of this is to say that the CCP would have no interest in dialogue with the DPP, since the DPP is fully uninterested in unification with China, which is the CCP’s sole goal in talks with Taiwanese authorities. Nevertheless, Lai’s suggestion of such talks is not without purpose. Lai is demonstrating to Taiwanese voters and the international community that the DPP is open to talks with the CCP, and open to peaceful resolution of any cross-strait disagreements.
This openness also serves to invalidate any suggestions by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) that the DPP is the cause of a diplomatic impasse between Taiwan and China.
KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) on Wednesday said that “both sides of the Taiwan Strait are part of a collective ethnic Chinese group and share the same Chinese culture.”
The only difference between the two sides is in their respective political systems, Chu said.
“Only by seeking common ground while respecting differences can the two sides of the Taiwan Strait maintain peace,” he said.
Chu’s first point is irrelevant, since many countries share linguistic and cultural commonalities. Should Singapore be a part of China, as the majority of its population is Chinese speakers who follow traditions also found in China? Should the US be a part of the UK, as most Americans speak English as their first language, and they adhere to holidays and religious traditions also found in the UK?
Chu’s second point lacks context, since he does not explain how China’s political system is relevant to cross-strait relations, and his third point is moot because it arguably applies to all bilateral relations.
It makes little sense for the KMT to argue that Lai should communicate with Beijing, when it very clearly is Beijing that is not open to communication with Lai.
The CCP employs a “carrot and stick” approach when it comes to its relations with Taiwan. It uses trade barriers to try to turn the public against the DPP, and it rewards Taiwanese who follow its “one China policy” and pro-unification agenda. Therefore, tourism restrictions are likely to be lifted only if Beijing can paint the lifting as an achievement of the KMT, which it apparently considers to be pliable.
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
International debate on Taiwan is obsessed with “invasion countdowns,” framing the cross-strait crisis as a matter of military timetables and political opportunity. However, the seismic political tremors surrounding Central Military Commission (CMC) vice chairman Zhang Youxia (張又俠) suggested that Washington and Taipei are watching the wrong clock. Beijing is constrained not by a lack of capability, but by an acute fear of regime-threatening military failure. The reported sidelining of Zhang — a combat veteran in a largely unbloodied force and long-time loyalist of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — followed a year of purges within the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA)
On the last day of the extended legislative session on Friday last week, the Legislative Yuan, with a slight majority held by the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), continued to refuse to review the government’s annual budget for this year, which is already overdue. It was the first time in Taiwan’s constitutional history that the government budget was not reviewed in its supposed legislative session. Instead, the opposition rushed to pass three controversial bills, which many people have criticized as self-serving. Since the Executive Yuan submitted its annual budget proposal to the Legislative Yuan in August last
RSS