Reportedly, Beijing has extended an invitation to Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) to attend a cross-party forum in China. It is widely believed that both Lien and Soong will accept the invitation. If this is true, Beijing is in the process of turning dialogue with the pan-blue opposition leaders into a routine matter. The implications of this for future cross-strait relations need to be closely examined.
One agreement reached between Chinese Communist Party chief and President Hu Jintao (
As with Hu's meetings with Lien and Soong, the significance of such a forum is mostly symbolic: it helps reinforce Beijing's "one China" principle. Just imagine: If representatives from all of China's political parties, including the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its puppet parties, congregate in one room with Lien and Soong among them, wouldn't that present an ideal opportunity for "one China" propaganda? The underlying message obviously would be that political parties in Taiwan are no different from other parties in China.
It should surprise none that President Chen Shui-bian (
The "Chinese" political parties -- including the KMT and PFP -- can chat amongst themselves until their faces turn red. But the forum will remain empty talk, because the KMT and PFP are merely opposition parties in Taiwan. No substantive change in cross-strait relations can come about until Beijing speaks with the duly elected leader of Taiwan -- which happens to be President Chen. Fortunately for Taiwan, Chen isn't ready to sell out Taiwan by embracing the "one China" principle in exchange for photo opportunities and tea with Hu. And that's why Beijing doesn't invite him.
One cannot help but ask the following: If Beijing knows perfectly well that speaking with Taiwan's opposition politicians won't help resolve the immediate problems in cross-strait relations, why bother?
First and foremost, such meetings create an illusion in the international community that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are preparing to bury the hatchet. This will help ease the international pressure that China's has received for its military threats against Taiwan.
There is also the potential for "gradual unification" -- as pointed out by many commentators in Taiwan with increasing alarm. If more and more individuals, politicians and sectors within Taiwan bypass the government and willingly relegate their exchanges and contacts with the other side of the Taiwan Strait to the status of "domestic" or "internal" contacts, de facto unification may one day become a reality.
Finally, there is the issue of the messages conveyed by Taiwan's opposition to Beijing during their visits, which are closely monitored by the international community. They may speak on behalf of the segment of the Taiwanese public which supports unification -- a minority of the population, it should be pointed out. But because the pan-blue leaders' contacts with Beijing are often high profile, their pro-unification stance is amplified, creating the impression that they represent the mainstream view.
Given those dangers, pan-blue politicians should learn to behave in a more responsible manner in their contacts with Beijing.
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