The irony, not to mention cynical politics, that surrounds the visits to China by Taiwan's two opposition leaders is inescapable.
The irony first. One after the other, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) paraded through China like provincial governors of old, visiting historic sites and ancestral homes before arriving in Beijing where they performed symbolic kowtows before the Dragon Throne, this time bearing the trappings of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
The Chinese, who are masters of political and diplomatic charm, having taken in sophisticates such as former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger and former US president Bill Clinton, went all out to seduce Lien and Soong. They were feted and applauded at every turn, Lien telling reporters that "we have been warmly received by the central committee of the Communist Party."
The Chinese even offered Lien two pandas to take home.
While the press in China acclaimed the visits as a "historic moment bringing springtime" and polls in Taiwan were generally favorable, not everyone in Taipei was happy.
Protesters asserted that Lien and Soong were traitors who had sold out to Beijing. Chen accused Soong of breaking an agreement calling for self-determination for Taiwan. Chen, seeking a counterstrategy, invited Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) to visit Taiwan "to see for himself whether Taiwan is a sovereign, independent country and what our 23 million people have in mind." The Chinese rejected the offer.
Given the history of the KMT and the CCP, the KMT's about-face was startling. Under former president Chiang Kai-shek (
In 1949, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) drove Chiang and the KMT from the mainland to Taiwan. Chiang imposed a harsh dictatorship in which consorting with the CCP was punishable by death. The KMT claimed to be the legitimate government and Chiang's mantra was "reclaim the mainland."
The KMT's rule eased under Chiang's son, Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), and even more under Lee Teng-hui (李登輝). At the same time, an independence movement took hold among the Taiwanese, which provided support to the KMT's opponents, notably Chen. He beat Lien twice to wrest the presidency from the KMT.
Another irony. The KMT has blocked the purchase of arms and military equipment from the US for four years despite the US undertaking to warn China against invading Taiwan.
Although former US president Jimmy Carter switched diplomatic relations to Beijing from Taipei in 1979, the US continued a strong commitment to the nation's security under the Taiwan Relations Act. The failure to follow through on the arms sale has caused Americans, including in Congress, to question Taiwan's zeal for providing for its own defense.
Now the cynical politics. Lien and Soong have played a "China card" in a blatant attempt to undermine Chen's authority and political standing.
The KMT, having played the spoiler on several domestic issues since Chen took office in 2000, is clearly looking forward to winning back the presidency in 2008 when Chen's term expires.
This maneuver, however, may not provide the KMT with the political lift it seeks. The Chinese have said that Chen must amend certain provisions of the nation's Constitution and accept their version of the "one China" policy before they will negotiate, a demand that Taiwanese voters may contend is interference.
And Lien and Soong's freelancing in foreign policy and undermining of the president might be seen as disloyalty.
Richard Halloran is a writer based in Hawaii.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
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