So it's been made official. There will be charter flights serving Taiwanese businessmen during the upcoming Lunar New Year. This time around, carriers from both sides of the Taiwan Strait will participate in providing two-way and non-stop flights between multiple Chinese and Taiwanese international airports. Equally, if not even more noteworthy, is the model of negotiation adopted, adding a third option to the models for cross-strait talks.
Both the Chinese and Taiwanese governments sent government officials to Macau for yesterday's negotiation, although they went in "unofficial" capacities. From the Taiwan side, Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA) director-general Billy Chang (
This model of negotiation is somewhat akin to the so-called "2002 Taiwan-Hong Kong model" of aviation negotiations, under which representatives from the private sectors were joined by aviation government officials from both sides who participated in non-official capacities. The difference is that in that round of negotiations officials from the Mainland Affairs Counsel (MAC) also joined the negotiations in an "unofficial" capacity.
As for the model that was used to initiate cross-strait negotiations in talks between Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) chairman Koo Chen-fu (
Actually, the two sides gradually and tactfully reached consensus about the substantive model of the air links before yesterday's talks. The significance of the talks in Macau were not only to make the deal official, but also in the model of negotiation established. Many believe that this latest model of negotiations may very well be the model used for talks on more permanent cross-strait direct links.
Indeed, this model is the bottom line beyond which the Taiwan government must not go. Any further concessions risk reducing cross-strait talks to negotiations over "domestic affairs." While the government officials involved in negotiations went in "unofficial" capacities, they were government officials nonetheless. These aviation talks, practically speaking, cannot proceed without officials' involvement to begin with, since none of the issues being discussed can possibly be decided by members of the private sector. This demonstrates that cross-strait links are in reality international links and not domestic links. As for the flight routes agreed on yesterday, they are in fact international air routes from Chinese cities to Hong Kong and then from Hong Kong to Taiwan. In this regard, the Taiwan government has not compromised the public interest.
The charter flights for the upcoming Lunar New Year are significant for several other reasons. Unlike in the 2003 flights, Chinese air carriers will also participate, passengers can board from both ends (the Taiwan side as well as the Chinese side), and the flights will be uninterrupted, meaning there will be no transit stops in either Hong Kong or Macau, although planes will pass through airspace of one of the territories. And for the first time ever, there will be Chinese aircraft bearing the People's Republic of China flag embarking and landing in Taiwan's airports.
While both the Chinese and Taiwan government claim that the charter flights are isolated cases tailored to serve Taiwanese businessmen, the question on everyone's mind is nevertheless this: Will cross-strait direct links be made official soon? However, the question that the Taiwan government should really ask itself is this: Is it ready to face up and deal with the potential problems of such official direct links?
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