A recent critique of former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s speech in Taiwan (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” by Sasha B. Chhabra, Aug. 12, page 8) seriously misinterpreted his remarks, twisting them to fit a preconceived narrative. As a Taiwanese who witnessed his political rise and fall firsthand while living in the UK and was present for his speech in Taipei, I have a unique vantage point from which to say I think the critiques of his visit deliberately misinterpreted his words. By dwelling on his personal controversies, they obscured the real substance of his message. A clarification is needed to highlight the substance and highlight the importance of his support for Taiwan.
First, the most damaging accusations centered on Johnson’s alleged misreading of Taiwan’s political situation. The author wrote that Johnson “frequently referred to Taiwan as a ‘segment of the Chinese population.’” However, a closer look at the full context reveals that Johnson used the phrase in a powerful rhetorical question to Beijing: “Is it really necessary for every segment of the Chinese population to be ruled by the Chinese Communist Party? Can there not be places ... that are differently Chinese?”
This explicitly challenges Beijing’s view and shows that the author misinterpreted Johnson.
The author also ignored Johnson’s full description of Taiwan’s population as one that “feels free, feels different and feels a strong sense of Taiwanese identity.” His words were not a political statement about unification with China, but a powerful cultural observation that highlights Taiwan’s distinct identity and unique democratic status.
The author also wrote that Johnson said most Taiwanese do not view their country as sovereign. This completely twisted Johnson’s actual statement that most Taiwanese do not want to “immediately declare they are a sovereign state.” This is a nuanced observation and is not a denial of Taiwan’s sovereignty, but a reflection of the society’s cautious attitude toward unilaterally altering the “status quo.”
Similarly, Johnson’s mention of Taiwan’s “massive” investment in China was not a suggestion for future policy, but a factual observation to illustrate Taiwan’s willingness to build bridges, and demonstrate its economic strength and goodwill, even while facing constant military threats.
The author also wrote that Johnson endorsed a “one country, two systems” framework, which is contradicted by his explicit condemnation of Beijing’s efforts to “impose Chinese communist rule,” “eradicate democracy” and “impose unification.” These strong phrases show that his stance is in direct opposition to Beijing’s political framework.
Beyond the specific words, the author also fundamentally misunderstood the speech’s core arguments. They incorrectly said that Johnson’s speech was artificial intelligence (AI)-generated and he denigrated migrant caregivers by suggesting AI could solve a shortage of care workers. However, Johnson’s comment was a carefully planned part of his speech to highlight a potential technological solution, which becomes possible through Taiwan’s crucial role in the global AI sector.
The author’s broader assessment of Johnson’s visit was also flawed. It wrongly dismissed him as a “has-been” with no influence and questioned the ethics of paying high speaking fees, a common practice for former world leaders. This perspective overlooks the strategic value of engaging prominent international figures. While no longer holding office, Johnson remains a key voice in domestic and international political discourse, providing insights on today’s pressing political issues.
Johnson successfully led a cross-party effort to make the UK one of Ukraine’s most vocal and leading supporters against Russia’s invasion, and has become a household name in Ukraine. His stature as a former British prime minister is an international asset, unequaled by those who have not held a senior Cabinet post. Engaging a figure of this caliber, who can generate global media attention and strengthen bipartisan support for Taiwan, is a valuable diplomatic investment.
The author’s analysis of Johnson’s speech relies heavily on misinterpretations and flawed assumptions. A careful reading of his full remarks reveals a supportive stance for Taiwan’s freedom and democracy, and a clear understanding of the threats it faces. Johnson is a steadfast ally of Taiwan who used his time and platform to defend its unique and vital role on the world stage.
Tseng Yueh-ying manages the Facebook page Translation Matters (翻譯有要緊), which serves as a forum for discussions on language and Taiwanese politics.
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto says he knows how to fix the problems facing Indonesia. Yet his economic mismanagement and authoritarian tendencies are steering the nation toward a familiar mix of currency instability and political chaos. The world’s fourth-most populous nation risks reversing the hard-won democratic and business reforms that came after the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. At that time, the rupiah collapsed and the political upheaval that followed forced former president Haji Mohamed Suharto from power. Prabowo’s administration is ignoring similar warning signs. That disconnect was apparent in a national address on Wednesday, when Prabowo projected the swagger that has
“Of course you can choose not to be Taiwanese, just do not stay here,” chairwoman of Taipei 101 operator Taipei Financial Center Corp Janet Chia (賈永婕) said in an online interview with local entertainer Tai Chih-yuan (邰智源), triggering intense discussion on social media, with politicians across party lines weighing in. In the interview, which was aired on May 14, Chia and Tai’s discussion over a meal in Taipei 101 covered Chia’s career change from entertainer to chairwoman and US climber Alex Honnold’s free solo climb up the Taipei 101 building. During the interview, Chia said, “Being on this land, we
RSS