Since Beijing passed the "Anti-Secession" Law last month, the cross-strait mood has become increasingly bizarre. Despite repeated warnings from the government, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
By ignoring the government, Lien has compelled President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to consider cooperating with the People First Party (PFP) and endorse a meeting between Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) and PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) early next month.
This strategy suggests Chen is attempting to lift Soong's status to undermine Lien and delegitimize anything he might achieve in Beijing.
So, even as two of the nation's most senior politicians prepare to cross the Strait, disputes between political parties are deteriorating into a sharper conflict.
The political parties involved have their own agendas, and plenty of dirty tricks have been used to get the upper hand.
But the KMT's decision to join forces with Beijing to derail DPP policy is both arrogant and short-sighted. Chen cannot afford to sit back and do nothing.
However, the tacit understanding between the DPP and the PFP to undermine Lien is not necessarily a good thing. Their actions may only serve to push Lien further into China's embrace, and will do nothing to make the KMT respect Taiwan or understand the need to oppose the Chinese Communist Party.
We should also bear in mind that the PFP is in total agreement with the KMT in regard to unification. How will Chen be able to face the people if Soong, in his talks in Beijing, says things that diverge from DPP policy?
In dealing with matters relating to national development and security such as cross-strait policies, it is inappropriate for the government to use short-term tactics to achieve political goals. It is far more important to build a consensus among the major parties, which is the reason why this newspaper has rebuked Lien so harshly for going it alone.
The major political parties must understand the importance of consensus-based action, otherwise it will be the Taiwanese people who will pay a heavy price for endless political squabbling.
Before Lien and Soong visit Beijing, it is crucial that the leaders of the three main parties hold a summit on national affairs.
Only if some level of consensus is reached will the KMT and PFP chairmen be able to engage in substantive negotiations with Beijing.
Otherwise, if cross-strait talks take place against a background of vicious inter-party strife, they will only lead to further political division and worsening confrontation.
To ensure that the Taiwanese people emerge as victors from these talks, the two party chairmen should demand legislators push through the long-delayed arms-procurement bill before arriving in China. We all know that peace is built on security, so Taiwan should first secure its position before entering into talks with China. Only then will the talks hold any meaning.
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
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS