China's "Anti-Secession" Law was one of the key issues for US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's two-day visit to Beijing. During a meeting with Rice on Sunday, Chinese President Hu Jintao (
Superficially, the two countries appeared equally matched in the meeting, but in fact, China had the upper hand, as it had already passed a law legitimizing in its own mind its threat of war against Taiwan. That law has shifted the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. In requesting that Beijing make efforts to reduce cross-strait tension, Washington was merely trying to remedy a situation that existed. There is no guarantee that Beijing will take up this proposal, so clearly Hu came off better in the talks.
When the 10th National People's Congress passed the law on March 14, Premier Wen Jiabao (
Taiwan opposes the law simply because it compels compliance with Beijing's will. This flies in the face of democracy and freedom. The violation of such fundamental values can never be counterbalanced by material interests.
Rice had the means of persuading China to reduce cross-strait tensions at her disposal, but she failed to make use of the opportunity. The means are the themes of "freedom" and "democracy" that figured so prominently in US President George W. Bush's second inauguration speech. The disparity between Taiwan and China is not only a question of incomes and quality of life, but one of values, beliefs and systems of government. This difference cannot be made to disappear through the use of guns, battleships or missiles.
The gulf that separates Taiwan and China cannot be spanned unless China is willing to undertake political reform that will give its people greater political rights, create a democratic government and resolve its social problems concurrently with its efforts to continue its economic development.
Since the passage of the "Anti-Secession" Law, antipathy and suspicion of China among the people of Taiwan has increased. Taiwan's anxiety about China can only be reduced if the Beijing leadership is prepared to show respect for Taiwan's existence, introduce measures that guarantee its security and enhance the prosperity of Taiwan's society. For example, they could stop blocking Taiwan efforts to join the World Health Organization as an observer and sign free-trade agreements with other countries. This would pave the way toward cross-straits negotiations founded on equality.
Taiwan's perception of the "one country, two systems" model has been a negative one. The departure of Hong Kong's former chief executive Tung Chee-hwa (
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,