Recently, several Facebook groups have shared a post by someone named Wayne Boyle, which says that the participation of Palauan officials in last week’s Halifax International Security Forum (HFX) in Taipei might contravene Beijing’s “one China” principle. The post emphasized that Palau should not become a bargaining chip in Taiwan’s confrontation with China. The post notes that its author is a “New Zealand journalist,” but upon investigation, the account has no prior post history aside from this article. It is possible that it is a fake account, created for the purpose of forming a “consensus” by sharing the post to other accounts and groups, thereby successfully manipulating public opinion through information warfare.
HFX is a globally renowned security conference that discusses democratic values, international security and strategic issues in the Indo-Pacific region. The forum was held in Canada in November last year, where the 2020 John McCain Prize for Leadership in Public Service was awarded to former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) in recognition of her contributions.
This move triggered strong protests from China, which criticized it as an infringement of its “one China” principle. On Thursday and Friday last week, the forum was held in Taiwan for the first time, further strengthening Taiwan’s international diplomacy and highlighting China’s hostility toward the forum.
Palau is a diplomatic ally of Taiwan — the two countries have cooperated in the areas of healthcare, economics, education and more. Taiwan has assisted Palau in constructing medical facilities, dispatched medical teams to provide aid and enhanced local infrastructure through technical cooperation projects.
Furthermore, Palau has voiced its support for Taiwan in international forums, including openly advocating for Taiwan’s increased international participation at the UN General Assembly. This relationship has provided Taiwan and Palau with a certain degree of mutual trust and cooperation on diplomatic and regional security issues.
However, this widely circulated Facebook post deliberately emphasized that Palau should take a “cautious” diplomatic stance, even suggesting that Palau’s strong relationship with Taiwan has led to a drop in Chinese tourists to the country, thereby impacting its economic development. It further argues that the Palauan government should — in protecting its national interests — appropriately handle its relationship with China, rather than becoming a victim of the Taiwan Strait issue.
However, the article fails to clearly specify what kind of unnecessary political pressure Palau is facing, nor does it explain which party is engaging in said coercion and inducement. Instead, it uses vague language to lead readers into believing that Palau should not have sent officials to participate in the HFX Taipei forum — which has no real influence — attempting to sow uncertainty in the Taiwan-Palau relationship.
Taiwan and Palau’s friendship is solid, and the two countries’ official interactions and exchanges are normal diplomatic activities that should not be influenced by such vaguely positioned articles. Such narratives that easily mislead readers and create unnecessary trouble are a common tactic in information warfare. Given the presently changing situation in the Indo-Pacific region, we must exercise more caution when judging content that deliberately blurs the focus and creates a divisive atmosphere to prevent the manipulation of public opinion.
Elliot Yao is a reviewer.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Taiwan’s fall would be “a disaster for American interests,” US President Donald Trump’s nominee for undersecretary of defense for policy Elbridge Colby said at his Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday last week, as he warned of the “dramatic deterioration of military balance” in the western Pacific. The Republic of China (Taiwan) is indeed facing a unique and acute threat from the Chinese Communist Party’s rising military adventurism, which is why Taiwan has been bolstering its defenses. As US Senator Tom Cotton rightly pointed out in the same hearing, “[although] Taiwan’s defense spending is still inadequate ... [it] has been trending upwards
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
In an eloquently written piece published on Sunday, French-Taiwanese education and policy consultant Ninon Godefroy presents an interesting take on the Taiwanese character, as viewed from the eyes of an — at least partial — outsider. She muses that the non-assuming and quiet efficiency of a particularly Taiwanese approach to life and work is behind the global success stories of two very different Taiwanese institutions: Din Tai Fung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). Godefroy said that it is this “humble” approach that endears the nation to visitors, over and above any big ticket attractions that other countries may have
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has
RSS