On Friday, Beijing's National Tourism Administration announced a plan to lift restrictions on tourist travel to Taiwan and said it hoped to engage in negotiations through the model used for the Lunar New Year charter flights.
At first glance, this may appear to be a "generous gift" from China -- at least that is the way that Beijing and some groups within Taiwan would like to portray the move. However, a closer look reveals that this will most likely not bring the kind of benefits that the people of Taiwan -- especially the tourism industry -- are hoping for.
A skill that Beijing apparently is sharpening in dealing with Taiwan is to exaggerate the benefits of its supposed goodwill gestures to create an illusion of magnanimity. So long as it successfully creates the desired impression, very few people bother to check later whether any substantive benefits actually result.
Two cases in point are the recent trips to China by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
Another case in point is the so-called "opening up" promised by Beijing in September on travel by Xiamen residents to Kinmen through the existing "small three links." In the six months since that policy's implementation, only 300 people have been approved for such trips by the Chinese government. This figure is significantly lower than what had been anticipated. Reportedly, this is because it takes up to a month for the Chinese tourists to get government approval.
It is noteworthy that the statement issued by the National Tourism Administration on Friday failed to touch on how much "opening up" Beijing has in mind, in terms of the number of visits it will allow, as well as simplifying and shortening the approval process on the Chinese side. Under the circumstances, those critics in Taiwan who were quick to complain about the number tentatively offered by Taiwan's government -- to allow up to 1,000 Chinese tourists into Taiwan each day -- in all likelihood spoke too quickly. It won't be a big surprise if far fewer Chinese tourists end up coming to Taiwan each day due to the Chinese government's bureaucracy.
And that's not to mention the fact that Taiwan's government still hasn't figured out a way to deal with the problem of Chinese tourists remaining here illegally. The recent visits by Chinese tourists traveling to Taiwan from third countries is a telling example. Taiwan opened up to this kind of tourism in 2002, and already visitors are staying here illegally. That problem will only be amplified under the more comprehensive opening up now being contemplated.
Then there is the issue of the model for negotiations. Unlike the one-off Lunar New Year charter flights, opening up to Chinese tourists requires a comprehensive and permanent policy. More formal government-to-government negotiations are in order. Otherwise, Taiwan may pay a steep price on the sovereignty issue in exchange for meager economic benefits.
In Taiwan's exchanges and dealings with Beijing thus far, China has never lost a single round or made any substantive concession. Under the circumstances, with respect to those people who sincerely feel excited about this so-called "opening up" of tourism to Taiwan, one can only admire their innocence.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS