This is not a letter from an irate Taiwanese. This is from an incredulous Malaysian on the
logic of Singaporean Foreign Minister George Yeo's (楊榮文) speech at the UN General Assembly. His criticism of Taiwan is unwarranted in light of Singapore's history and the even-handed treatment it received when it broke away from the Malaysian Federation in 1965. Mind you, Singapore willingly joined the federation in the first place because it perceived there to be advantages in being part of a larger nation.
The point is this: When
Singapore joined the federation in 1963, its government effectively reduced itself to a provincial government. I would think that once a state enters into a political union it gives up certain rights, such as the right to secede.
Throughout history, the exercising of this right has been labeled as anything from "rebellion" to "separatism." I can only think of the breakup of Singapore and Malaysia and the former Czechoslovakia as examples of peaceful separation.
In both cases, the parties involved acted like adults. They sat down, talked and arrived at a mutually agreed solution. I believe that had the federal government of the day chosen to do so, it could have forced the union upon Singapore.
This is in stark contrast to the situation in the Taiwan Strait. Here we have one country laying claim to another country. The People's Republic of China (PRC) has never controlled Taiwan in any way or form. The Republic of China on the other hand lost the mainland to the communists, but kept insisting it was the only legitimate ruler of China. This thickheadedness has left Taiwan with a historical burden, and the average Taiwanese knows this.
As the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) grip on power slowly eroded, the natives rightly wished to put things right by doing away with the ROC and navigating their own destiny. What is wrong with that? George Yeo's derision of Taiwanese independence is therefore most unwarranted, shameless and intellectually bankrupt.
Singapore was able to secede from a union it had clamored to join. Taiwan on the other hand is simply maintaining a sovereignty that is not recognized by Singapore or most of the rest of the world.
Mr. Yeo, please don't let your reverence for Greater China blind you to reality. The same goes for you too, [Prime Minister] Lee Hsien Loong (
The modern ROC is no longer synonymous with the KMT, and it is no longer suppressed by KMT nationalist doctrine. It therefore no longer necessarily believes in reunification. More and more people are beginning to realize the existence of their own culture and consciousness.
This nation has developed separately from China. In fact, China owes much of its present prosperity to Taiwanese businessmen, who are investing heavily there. The Taiwanese, on the other hand, have not received a single word of thanks, only the constant threat of invasion or annihilation. China would have all others believe that those businessmen are patriots returning to the motherland.
Instead of swallowing Chinese propaganda and believing that cross-strait tensions are an internal problem, UN members should take the step of providing Taiwan with some political protection against Chinese aggression.
Taiwan is part of the global village, like it or not. Help it break out of its isolation, not trample on its evolution. It is belligerent China that is missing the opportunity to resolve the dispute peacefully.
Y.J. Ho
Tainan
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS