It has been more than a week since President William Lai (賴清德) gave his address to the nation to mark Double Ten National Day on Oct. 10. It seems that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) did not regard his address as sufficiently provocative to warrant a demonstration of its ire: There was no multiservice military drill around Taiwan, unlike Joint Sword-2024B, held four days after last year’s address.
Whatever this muted response from the CCP means, Lai’s speech was interesting because of how it compared with his National Day address last year. His speech on Friday last week either represented a change in tack in his approach to cross-strait tensions or an extension of an evolving strategy.
Last year’s address was not particularly provocative, but Lai got his shots in at a previous event, the Double Ten National Day gala at the Taipei Dome on Oct. 5 last year. During the gala, Lai had mused that, as the Republic of China (ROC) had been founded several decades prior to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the ROC was technically the “motherland” of the PRC, not the other way around. This was an obvious jibe at the CCP and a conciliatory wink at the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). The observation’s inherent absurdity sharpened the jibe and blunted the overture.
There were no jibes this year, just as there were no conciliatory winks to the opposition. Conspicuous by its absence was any acknowledgement of the divisions and enmity of the recall movement, nor were there any attempts to address tensions at home. The overtures in this year’s speech were instead aimed at Beijing.
This year, after the opening remarks, Lai spent about 20 percent of his time speaking about the government’s plans to improve trade and invest in business and industry, while about 15 percent of his speech outlined policies aimed at improving the lives of ordinary Taiwanese. Finally, he turned to remarks on national defense and societal resilience.
The logic of a speech’s organization can go many ways: It can follow the principle of placing the most important aspects first, or leading up to the most important aspect, which is left to last, as that is what remains more clearly in the mind of the listener. As to which logic lay behind this speech, look at the opening paragraphs.
Lai said: “Sept. 10 was the historic date when the number of days Taiwan had spent free from martial law officially surpassed the number of days endured under its stifling rule. This signifies that we have parted entirely from an authoritarian regime and its shadow.”
He thus set the context for the arc of his argument: Taiwan as a free, democratic nation, liberated from the authoritarian KMT post-Chinese Civil War regime and resistant to the CCP’s desire to return the nation to governance under authoritarian masters.
The sections on Taiwan’s economic prosperity and the investment in its future, and the promise of translating them into improvements that ordinary people would feel in their daily lives, were Lai’s way of impressing on his audience the importance of defense, deterrence and resilience in the face of threats of invasion and annexation.
In the absence of the possibility of direct communication with the CCP under the preconditions of so-called “1992 consensus” or a return to the early dichotomy of the ROC’s and PRC’s interpretations of “one China” that traditional elements within the KMT would like to see, Lai was offering a vision of a more rational regional cohabitation: adherence to the “status quo,” no mention of a declaration of independence, the avoidance of war, the protection of life and property, a shared commitment to mutual prosperity, and learning the lessons of the past regarding the destruction of war.
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
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
RSS