After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman-elect Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) victory in the party’s leadership race, the KMT’s intent to bring in external forces to counter its domestic political rivals became all the more apparent.
There is no shortage of such stories in history. At the end of the Ming Dynasty, militant Wu Sangui (吳三桂) — in seeking revenge for the loss of his concubine after rebels captured Beijing — opened the Shanghai Pass to allow the Qing army to enter. While the Qing forces indeed defeated peasant rebel leader Li Zicheng (李自成), they ultimately destroyed the Ming Dynasty. Wu later rebelled himself, only to be crushed by the Qing army.
At the end of the Tang Dynasty, warlord Zhu Quanzhong (朱全忠) relied on the Shatuo Turks (沙陀突厥) to suppress the remnants of the peasant rebellion led by black-market salt dealer Huang Chao (黃巢), but the two later turned against one another, plunging the realm into chaos.
Every historical instance of borrowing power has resulted in a century of humiliation. Those who seek to kill with a borrowed knife inevitably suffer the backlash. History has demonstrated countless times that external forces never offer help for free. Rather, they provide a fleeting reward before seizing the entire country.
Taiwan’s pro-China faction has forgotten history and discarded its lessons, driven by its own illusions. What is referred to as the “pro-China camp” has shifted from a political stance to a weak sense of sovereignty. When a political party relies on a foreign hostile power, it no longer represents voters — it is merely an agent of the enemy.
What was once a self-run business has become a franchise, degenerating into a branch directly managed by the other side of the Taiwan Strait. In politics, this is a betrayal of loyalty.
From Wu to Cheng, the problem has never been in China’s strength, but instead in that some in Taiwan seek to invite foreign powers to destroy their domestic political rivals.
Yet history has already written the ending — those who rely on external forces would eventually be devoured by them.
Chang Shang-yang is a farmer.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
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
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
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS