Prior to World War II, Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany declared that Austrians and Germans were of the same race and spoke the same language, and the inclusion of Austria in the Third Reich was therefore a holy mission. In an attempt to oppose Germany's blatant ambition to invade Austria, a referendum was planned for March 1938 to let Austrians decide their own future through peaceful and democratic means. On the eve of the referendum, Germany invaded and then annexed Austria.
Shortly thereafter, Hitler declared that the people in the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia were descendants of the German people and that the region should be returned to Germany. Because Great Britain and France feared a military conflict with Germany, then-British prime minister Neville Chamberlain and French prime minister Edouard Daladier signed a treaty with Hitler in September 1938, agreeing to the German annexation of the Sudetenland. Czechoslovakia, which was not invited to the treaty meeting, was forced to accept the deal by London and Paris, who said they would not intervene should the issue lead to war between Germany and Czechoslovakia.
On his return from Munich, Chamberlain said he had engineered an exchange that would give Europe a generation of peace. Hitler, however, promptly occupied all of Czechoslovakia. In 1939, he used the excuse that Gdansk was German territory to invade Poland. Two days later the UK and France declared war on Germany and World War II began in Europe.
Looking back at that time, the Nazis were encouraged not only by German nationalism, but the naive appeasement of both Britain and France. Even Russia signed a non-aggression treaty with Germany right before the Germans invaded Poland. As a result, Hitler feared nothing.
China's claims to sovereignty over Tibet, Xinjiang, the Tiaoyutai and even Taiwan -- and the rhetoric Beijing uses -- is shockingly similar to Nazi Germany and its claims on its neighbors.
Beijing has passed a law -- the "Anti-Secession" Law -- to authorize war and legitimize future military expansion. The law is clearly aimed at Taiwan. In the past few years, Chinese nationalists have repeatedly asked, "Where should the sea port for China's warships be -- in the Taiwan Strait or the Pacific Ocean?" The question is where will China stop? Will it also lay claim to Singapore and Penang as overseas territories of China on the grounds that Chinese people have historically resided there?
Moreover, the attitude of Europe's current leaders toward the autocratic Chinese regime is astonishingly similar to those of Chamberlain and Daladier when dealing with Hitler. French and German political leaders should learn from history when dealing with the cross-strait issue and the lifting of the EU arms embargo on China in order to avoid a repeat of the tragic Munich Pact.
Although Taiwan is a long way from Europe, its passionate pursuit for democracy and freedom is not any different from that of the EU's member states. When it comes to the cross-strait issue, the EU leaders' callous disregard for a democratic nation in Asia is tragic. We can only hope it does not lead to a greater tragedy.
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS