If the competing territorial claims between the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in China and the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan were represented as a Venn diagram, the central overlap would contain Taiwan’s outlying Kinmen and Lienchiang (Matsu) counties.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) could claim a historical and legal right over the territories, certainly with more legitimacy than it could for its claim over Taiwan proper, as the islands were part of China prior to the end of World War II. The ROC claims control over them because the ROC defended them against the CCP after it was expelled from China in 1949.
However, is Taiwan still engaged in a civil war with China, as Beijing contends, or has it long been an independent, sovereign, self-ruling country, as most Taiwanese see it?
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might claim all parts of the Venn diagram, but that would be an absurd proposition today. The CCP does claim the entire diagram, but its claims over Taiwan proper have no historical basis, in international law or in reality, and so are equally absurd.
KMT Legislator Chen Yeong-kang (陳永康) has proposed amendments to the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例), which would transfer jurisdiction over the waters surrounding Kinmen and Matsu to the Coast Guard Administration, from the Ministry of National Defense. Chen said the amendments are to reduce the possibility of a military conflict in the area, and would in no way dilute Taiwan’s sovereignty.
However, the proposal says that the relationship between the PRC and the ROC is one of an unresolved civil war. That characterization implies “one China.” That, in turn, would mean the Taiwan Strait is effectively an inland sea belonging to that “one China,” and not a waterway between two sovereign nations that is considered international waters.
In the past few years, Chinese officials have increasingly tried to push the idea that the Taiwan Strait does not constitute international waters, while many countries have sent ships through it to consolidate its status as international waters and their right of innocent passage under international law, specifically the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
If the CCP wins that argument, there would be no necessary right of passage; China would control an important shipping lane and be able to constrict passage by military and commercial vessels. That would also mean that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army could blockade Taiwan and implement “customs inspections” in the area, severely impacting international trade and supply chains, and with some legitimacy. It would also force Taiwan into accepting Beijing’s terms. It could equally demand that other countries do not intervene, because that would constitute “external interference” in China’s “domestic affairs.”
It could also more legitimately call for negotiations based on the so-called “1992 consensus.”
The significant change of affairs, originating in what appears to be an innocent proposal for an amendment designed to reduce tensions, would play right into the hands of the CCP and its concerted “lawfare” plans that go all the way back to the implementation of the 2005 “Anti-Secession Law.” For that reason, the proposed amendments should be treated with caution and suspicion. The same applies to the party that is promoting them.
On March 22, 2023, at the close of their meeting in Moscow, media microphones were allowed to record Chinese Communist Party (CCP) dictator Xi Jinping (習近平) telling Russia’s dictator Vladimir Putin, “Right now there are changes — the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years — and we are the ones driving these changes together.” Widely read as Xi’s oath to create a China-Russia-dominated world order, it can be considered a high point for the China-Russia-Iran-North Korea (CRINK) informal alliance, which also included the dictatorships of Venezuela and Cuba. China enables and assists Russia’s war against Ukraine and North Korea’s
After thousands of Taiwanese fans poured into the Tokyo Dome to cheer for Taiwan’s national team in the World Baseball Classic’s (WBC) Pool C games, an image of food and drink waste left at the stadium said to have been left by Taiwanese fans began spreading on social media. The image sparked wide debate, only later to be revealed as an artificially generated image. The image caption claimed that “Taiwanese left trash everywhere after watching the game in Tokyo Dome,” and said that one of the “three bad habits” of Taiwanese is littering. However, a reporter from a Japanese media outlet
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
RSS