A long-standing dispute with Japan over a fishing zone has reached a new climax, with reports of Taiwanese fishing boats being forcibly expelled from the disputed area. This is not the first such incident. Similar disagreements with other countries, such as the Philippines, have also occurred in the past. Unfortunately, the government's handling of such disputes has been weakened by the country's unique international status.
The disputed fishing zone in the Yellow Sea and East China Sea is in an area which Taiwan, Japan and China each claim to be within their 370km exclusive economic zones. Under normal circumstances, the three countries would have to engage in trilateral negotiations to resolve their overlapping claims. But Japan and China have negotiated a bilateral fishing pact, leaving Taiwan out in the cold.
The Sino-Japanese fishery pact took effect last June. In the pact, the two countries agreed that the disputed water will be deemed "intermediate water," in which the vessels of other countries are prohibited and for which the vessels of both countries will have to seek permission from the other before entry.
The agreement is not binding on Taiwan, which is an independent sovereign country. China has no right to negotiate on Taipei's behalf. Since bilateral negotiations between Japan and Taiwan are continuing -- even though the last round was in August 2001 -- the status quo between the two nations should be maintained. This means that Taiwanese fishermen should be allowed to fish in the disputed area. After all, putting aside the issue of overlapping economic zones, the area is a traditional fishing ground for Taiwanese fishermen.
It was totally inappropriate for Japan's coast guard to intercept Taiwanese fishing boats and to expel these vessels by firing water cannons and shooting paint bombs.
It is high time that the government took a firmer stand in such disputes. But the government's dilemma in handling the dispute is complicated by several factors. One is that many Taiwanese have traditionally felt a special tie to Japan. The second is that, pragmatically, Taipei cannot substitute diplomatic sanctions and pressure with economic ones -- the way it can with countries such as Thailand or Indonesia. After all, this country is still economically dependent upon Japan.
The same helplessness has long been reflected in the government's handling of its sovereignty dispute over the Tiaoyutai Islands.
The government must break this pattern of meekness and lose its inferiority complex over the country's international status. Begin to make loud noise, and take on a firm attitude in demanding amicable and fair resolution of such disputes. Insist on re-initiating bilateral negotiations with Japan to clearly map out Taiwan's fishing zones. Taiwanese fishermen have threatened to stand up to the Japanese coast guard themselves if they don't see any concrete action by the government. If that were to happen, the dispute would quickly escalate out of control.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,