In an interview with the Chinese-language Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) Minister of Education Cheng Ying-yao (鄭英耀) on Wednesday said that international exchanges are a positive experience for students.
However, he did not encourage attending exchange programs in China.
“I don’t encourage elementary school, high school or even university-level students to only consider China for international exchanges,” he said.
As expected, pro-unification academics were furious, accusing Cheng of damaging and undermining cross-strait exchanges.
However, the public is aware that nearly all exchanges with China are viewed with suspicion, often seen as components of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) broader “united front” strategy. At the same time, the Chinese military continues to conduct military drills around Taiwan.
Is there another country that behaves so brazenly? How can any meaningful exchange occur between Taiwan and China under these circumstances?
Imagine you were to open a small shop, but shortly afterward, a thug turns up brandishing weapons and falsely claiming that your shop belongs to him.
One would hardly engage in cultural exchanges with the thug.
Since Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) took office, China has engaged in nonstop verbal and military intimidation of Taiwan. Only a delusional political party would support exchanges with the CCP. Even tourism to China is entirely unnecessary — why should Taiwanese spend their money in a country that is openly hostile toward them? Why should they help its domestic market?
Mutual respect, equality and reciprocity are foundational principles for all people and nations. The CCP has been vulgar and arrogant, and only fools would still be keen on exchanges with them.
Cheng should stand firm in arguing for what is right.
Teng Hon-yuan is an associate professor at Aletheia University.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
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
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more
RSS