Cross-strait charter flights for the Lunar New Year have not even got off the ground before running into turbulence. After the Taipei Airlines Association, the government's aviation representative, met Chinese officials in Macau to discuss the flights for the Lunar New Year, a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation departed for Beijing to hold talks with officials of the Taiwan Affairs Office under the State Council and the Civil Aviation Administration of China. The issue has given China another opportunity to exploit disagreement between the Democratic Progressive Party and the KMT.
No matter what the KMT delegation proposes or promises, and no matter what the Chinese officials say, the government should stand firm on national security and dignity.
First, Beijing has refused to negotiate directly with the government, as well as refusing to meet official and semi-official organizations such as the Civil Aeronautics Administration and the Straits Exchange Foundation. China has placed the negotiations on a lower footing than those formulated for the "Hong Kong model" for flights between Taiwan and Hong Kong in 2002. With China setting the agenda, the result will be detrimental to the security, interests and dignity of Taiwan.
Second, the results of the "negotiations" run a real risk of contradicting government policy and doing more harm than good. The operation of these flights for Taiwanese businesspeople based in China is not something of value to most Taiwanese, but rather a concession out of good will to an influential but barely grateful pro-KMT minority. The government must therefore know when to cut its losses, pull out of the "negotiations" and cancel the deal. Trips home by Taiwanese businesspeople for the holidays are a private matter and should be arranged ahead of time.
This year, the flights are being used to promote the "Sinification" of Taiwan's economy and even government itself. It is a classic example of China using commerce for political ends, and using all-too-willing members of the opposition against the government.
Will the charter flights impact on Taiwan's security? It is possible that the flights this time will be "non-stop, round-trip, multi-destination flights by carriers on both sides," and as such the impact could be significant. Because the flights are no longer restricted to Taiwanese businesspeople, the result is direct flights in fact, if not in name. Once this door is opened, Taiwan could lose more industry and capital to China. If this happens, there will be nowhere to turn.
Since the Chinese government is now in a position to choose who it will discuss these details with, it can accelerate attempts to drive a deeper wedge between the government and the KMT, the latter still believing itself to be Taiwan's de facto government, though it should be noted that the People First Party has showed little enthusiasm for the KMT delegation's visit.
The government must be firm and clear on when to pull out. If the arrangements for the flights and China's propaganda impact on the safety and dignity of the nation, then the "negotiations" must stop immediately.
This country cannot sacrifice the security interests of the majority to serve the temporary convenience of a well-funded minority.
US political scientist Francis Fukuyama, during an interview with the UK’s Times Radio, reacted to US President Donald Trump’s overturning of decades of US foreign policy by saying that “the chance for serious instability is very great.” That is something of an understatement. Fukuyama said that Trump’s apparent moves to expand US territory and that he “seems to be actively siding with” authoritarian states is concerning, not just for Europe, but also for Taiwan. He said that “if I were China I would see this as a golden opportunity” to annex Taiwan, and that every European country needs to think
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
Today is Feb. 28, a day that Taiwan associates with two tragic historical memories. The 228 Incident, which started on Feb. 28, 1947, began from protests sparked by a cigarette seizure that took place the day before in front of the Tianma Tea House in Taipei’s Datong District (大同). It turned into a mass movement that spread across Taiwan. Local gentry asked then-governor general Chen Yi (陳儀) to intervene, but he received contradictory orders. In early March, after Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) dispatched troops to Keelung, a nationwide massacre took place and lasted until May 16, during which many important intellectuals
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means