Zhao Ziyang (
If the Chinese leadership had taken Zhao's advice to adopt a liberal approach in dealing with the pro-democracy protests in Tiananmen Square in 1989, the military would not have trampled over the protesters and China would not have faced an international boycott that hindered its economic development. Moreover, economic reform would have progressed hand-in-hand with political liberalization and the rift across the Taiwan Strait would not be so great. It is even possible that a stable cross-strait security structure would have been developed by now, rather than the two sides of the Strait eyeing each other with armed hostility.
Zhao had been expected to succeed Deng Xiaoping (
Zhao was the party secretary-general for just two years but he pioneered market reforms. During the Tiananmen Incident, he called for things to be dealt with through democratic and judicial means, thereby making a great contribution to his country. The Chinese leadership, however, have relegated Zhao and Hu Yaobang (
Today, China's economic and military might cannot be ignored. Although President Hu Jintao (
Democratic reform in China has stalled for 15 years since Zhao lost power. Although when Hu was preparing to take over the reins of power, he proposed reforms that might have moved the country closer to the rule of law, but these have since disappeared without trace. Last September, during the fourth plenary session of the 16th CCP Central Committee, Hu Jintao criticized former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev for his efforts at political liberalization and recommended adopting the methods of North Korea for the control of democratic sentiment and public opinion. He also called for the drawing up of an anti-secession bill as a weapon to be used against Taiwan.
As a leader of a regional power, Hu Jintao must learn that economic development and democratic reform are the wings of national development. The strength of both wings must be similar if development is to continue over the long term. Beijing can resist the calls of the public in the short term, but cannot ignore them indefinitely. To establish the foundation of long-term growth, to create cross-strait peace and international stability, Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jaibao (
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