Contrary to some excessive speculation that the government might loosen restrictions on cross-strait economic ties, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) reset the tone of his administration's cross-strait policy in his New Year address to the nation.
He replaced the old doctrine of "active opening, effective management" with more emphasis on reducing the risks in increasing exposure to China.
Although the Presidential Office has denied any change in the nation's cross-strait policy, Chen's reorientation was a timely reminder of what matters in a political atmosphere in which leaders of the pan-blue opposition parties and some pro-unification local media are manipulating public opinion to open the nation up to the China market.
While both Chen and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) suffered a severe decline in public support after the party's huge loss in last month's local elections, the direction of national policy should be consistent and not be forced to change simply because of one electoral result or a minor change in the overall political landscape.
Moreover, any reading of Chen's speech should not be based solely on the adjustment of putting more emphasis on "active management."
Rather, more attention should be paid to the whole context of Chen's address, including the military threat posed by China and Taiwan's severe lack of self-defense capabilities.
Although Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou's (馬英九) political influence is on the rise after securing the leadership of the pan-blue camp and probably the KMT's nomination for the next presidential election, the nation's independence will not be obscured by Ma's recent comment that "unification" is the KMT's ultimate goal.
Ma certainty has the right to openly embrace unification with China on behalf of his party. However, as the likely KMT candidate for the next presidential election and perhaps the most popular political figure in the country, Ma's words and deeds are significant in terms of China's "divide and conquer" strategy.
It is therefore imperative for the Chen administration and the DPP to assert the government's four principles of sovereignty, democracy, peace and parity as premises for cross-strait negotiations, as well as insisting on giving the Taiwanese people freedom of choice when it comes to the nation's developing relationship with China.
Moreover, complex cross-strait economic and trade policies should not be simplified into a dichotomy between "opening up" and "tightening up"; nor should "active opening" be given emphasis at the expense of the more important "effective management."
In other words, Taiwan cannot make concessions to China simply for the sake of making concessions.
With the 2008 Olympic Games on the way, and with the chances of the pan-blue camp regaining power in 2008 increasing, it is only natural for China to continue with its "no contact" policy toward Chen.
Under these circumstances, Chen must clearly understand the extent to which Taiwan can gain by "keeping a firm stance while moving forward pragmatically" with China.
By incorporating more effective management mechanisms, the government will not only reduce the risks involved in investing in China, but also maintain a relative advantage.
By emphasizing governmental or quasi-governmental negotiations on the opening of direct air links, Taiwan will be able to safeguard its own dignity and sovereignty.
The pan-blue camp may overlook Beijing's explicit political maneuverings -- such as the passage of the so-called "Anti-Secession" Law last March -- to enable the People's Liberation Army to "legally" attack Taiwan, but the DPP government should keep reminding Taiwanese people of the importance of maintaining national security in addition to purely economic interests.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS