At a post-election international press conference, president-elect Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) expressed his intention to visit the US, Japan and Singapore before his inauguration on May 20. If Ma makes these trips without any political repercussions, it would definitely set a precedent for high-ranking officials, perhaps even the president, to visit major countries.
Nevertheless, as the administration of US President George W. Bush seems to be reluctant to approve a visit by Ma, his plans seem fated to fail for very obvious reasons.
Although he has not been sworn in yet, the fact that Ma received such a strong mandate from the public and that he has now become the symbol of a sovereign country that China will not accept means that he stands on the wrong side of Beijing’s “red line.”
Sovereignty is not an option for Taiwan, as far as Beijing is concerned.
Although Ma has yet to take office, his visits to those countries would attract wide media coverage and constitute a headache for Beijing.
Unless Ma’s Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has made an under-the-table deal with Chinese authorities concerning the proposed trips to ensure that sovereignty will not be discussed during the visits, Ma will be blocked by Beijing. Chinese interference at every stop would certainly make for a humiliating trip.
The fact that Ma expressed his desire to make the trip without first consulting Washington, Tokyo or Singapore has already caused controversy for the leaders of those countries.
The governments of the US, Japan and Singapore all sent congratulatory messages to the Ma camp immediately after he won the presidential election. They also indicated their hope that the cross-strait dialogue would soon resume and tension would ease.
In his telephone conversation with Bush, Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) reportedly said Beijing could accept the so-called “1992 consensus,” under which each side of the Taiwan Strait should be allowed to have its own definition of “one China.”
But does Hu’s spurious gesture of “goodwill” translate into Chinese approval for Taiwan’s newly elected president to visit Washington at such a sensitive juncture?
Tokyo will also be caught in a dilemma if it allows Ma to visit before May 20.
Hu is scheduled to visit Japan later this month. Japan would hardly be willing to jeopardize Hu’s visit by allowing Ma to go to Tokyo.
In the case of Singapore, it is likely to follow in the footsteps of the US and Japan on this matter.
If the visits to these countries are basically impossible, why did Ma take the risk of seeking such visits?
Ma’s diplomatic maneuvring reflects his double standards concerning the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration’s foreign policy.
During his election campaign, Ma accused the DPP of being confrontational and a trouble-maker on the international front, and especially concerning relations with the US and China.
Ma’s party also called President Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) 14 state visits during his two terms “money diplomacy.”
The KMT said that the only result of Chen’s overseas trips was to provoke Beijing to buy out the nation’s allies.
If that is true, wouldn’t Ma’s attempt to visit Japan and the US risk raising Beijing’s hackles too? How does he intend to make peace with Beijing and win more international space for Taiwan if Chinese authorities find his actions as provoking as Chen’s?
Liu Shih-chung is vice chairman of the Research and Planning Committee at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
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