The Chinese government released a statement on the Taiwan issue after midnight on May 16. Since the statement was authorized by the government, and was issued so close to President Chen Shui-bian's (
The speech shows the carrot and the stick approach, as it included hardline principles and threats as well as flexible and pragmatic suggestions. It was not necessarily "an unprecedented severe threat to Taiwan," as the opposition camp claimed.
The statement repeatedly attacked Chen's "five noes" principle accusing him of lacking honesty and credibility, firmly insisting on the "one China" principle while refusing to tolerate Taiwan's independence. From this perspective, whether Chen would mention the "five noes" again in his speech was not a concern to Beijing anymore. Nevertheless, the statement did not mention the "one country, two systems" policy either. Although it insisted on the "one China" principle, it did not specify the concrete content of this principle. This time, Beijing's conditions for cross-strait development were not based on Taipei's acceptance of the "one China" principle. Instead, the statement simplified Chinese Vice Premier Qian Qichen's (
Among the seven suggestions in the statement, the first suggestion vacuously but positively responded to Chen's call for building a "peace and stability framework." Apart from the old issue of the opening of cross-strait links, Beijing also added the negotiation of Taiwan's international survival space and closer economic cooperation on the basis of reciprocity.
The seven suggestions were not necessarily all good for Taiwan. Still, changes such as preliminary recognition of Chen's "peace and stability framework" and the mention of Taiwan's need for international space had positive meanings. This shows that US Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly's statements that the US "continues to urge Beijing and Taipei to pursue dialogue as soon as possible through any available channels" and "the US continues to be a strong supporter of Taiwan's participation in international organizations" affected the attitudes of Chinese President Hu Jintao (
The statement was the most important message since the new leadership took control of Taiwan affairs in January, and its content varied from Jiang's eight points. The attacks on Chen's honesty and credibility, as well as the insistence on the "one China" principle, satisfied the demands of the hawks. On the other hand, the changes demonstrated the pragmatic components of China's thinking on Taiwan, showing that Hu and Wen have noted that "Taiwan recognition" has become a mainstream value, and that it's necessary to deal with the issue pragmatically. The statement was also a positive response to Kelly's words. The statement shows that although Beijing is not too optimistic about the cross-strait issue, the situation is not hopeless.
Lai I-chung directs foreign policy studies at the Taiwan Thinktank.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS