Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators Joanna Lei (
The broadside came after the American Forces Press Service, a US Department of Defense publication, ran stories on its Web site last weekend on the DPP's planned plebiscite -- for entering the UN as "Taiwan" -- as an "independence" referendum.
If either had bothered to read to the end of the paragraph then they could have saved their breath. In their attempts to highlight the reference to the KMT's dreaded "independence," they failed to notice -- or deliberately overlooked -- the very end of the same sentence, where the author paraphrased US President George W. Bush as referring to Taiwan as an "island nation."
A strange choice of words, this, considering it has been just a few weeks since Dennis Wilder, a top Bush adviser and senior director for East Asian affairs at the National Security Council, stated categorically that the US does not view Taiwan (or the Republic of China) as a state.
Nevertheless, Taiwan's representatives in the US immediately contacted their Washington counterparts for clarification and, as if by magic, the offending references were promptly corrected the following day by the Pentagon, which conceded that the original wording was "inaccurate."
Thus the true culprit in this instance was revealed: careless reporting.
As anyone involved in journalism is aware, reporting on cross-strait affairs can be a minefield. It is a forum where adding a stray "re" to the front of "unification" can mean trouble.
Yet time and again we see the same erroneous and sensational reporting on Taiwan-China affairs. It is easy to lose count of the number of times one sees the phrase: "The US is obligated to come to Taiwan's aid in the event of a Chinese invasion" or variations on this theme in international wire copy, despite the fact that it is incorrect.
Those with limited knowledge of nuances and terminology used in cross-strait affairs can get into all kinds of trouble with just one or two inaccurate words or phrases.
Jim Garamone, the offender in this case, is an experienced reporter who, according to his online biography, has covered defense issues since 1976. Whether he has had much experience in reporting on cross-strait affairs is not clear. But one thing is for sure: Garamone has had a week to remember the fallout from this minor fuss -- and a crash course in Cross-Strait Terminology 101 to boot. It is quite safe to say that he will not make the same mistakes again.
This highlights the pressure that reporters who work for responsible news organizations must endure. Their work is held up to the highest standards of scrutiny, and any incorrect information or falsehoods are liable to have serious consequences and are usually immediately brought to light.
Unfortunately, Taiwanese reporters and politicians are not subject to the same stringent standards as their US counterparts. While Garamone's errors were quickly highlighted and changed, the same cannot be said about the KMT legislators who used this "inaccurate" report to make political capital.
So far there have been no reports of Lei and Shuai holding a press conference to retract their comments and even apologize. But why should we expect contrition? Their mission to undermine a democratic referendum process and turn public opinion against the government has been accomplished and for that they make no apology.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS