The reopening of talks between the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) and the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS), together with partial agreements on charter flights and increased Chinese tourism to Taiwan, has generated considerable interest in Taiwan to take the next step. More people, including many government personnel, will be able to visit China; civic groups are seeking to do the same. And at the top, the president is now seeking a “comprehensive economic cooperation pact” with China.
The first two agreements have been discussed for some time, but only now have they been accepted by both sides. Other agreements, such as allowing cargo flights, may eventually see the light of day. But continuing discussions with China on almost any subject will require expert advisers who understand the issues.
Reaching agreement on any subject will take much time, while the content of closed-door discussions — at least in democratic Taiwan — will inevitably become public, if not always in its entirety.
In seeking an economic cooperation pact, for example, the issues involved should be discussed in public. If not, any agreements made could lead to problems that will be difficult to resolve. As an example, there is the so-called “1992 consensus”: In invoking this slogan, China does not broach all that the term means to it, while Taiwan backs away from defending its sovereignty. Using past ambiguities to deal with today’s issues may not be wise.
Neither side wants to raise sensitive issues in discussions, and ambiguity will continue to prevail. So how will the people of Taiwan — a full democracy whose people have the right to know what its government is doing — be assured that their fundamental rights are being protected? This is a delicate and difficult task, and it falls to the president and his administration to meet both sides’ expectations.
The president’s first step was the SEF-ARATS meeting in Beijing. This was more important than the two agreements on flights and tourism. At the next meeting, it will harder to reach further agreement. And even if the meeting only covers economic matters, issues such as Taiwan’s need for international space will become increasingly difficult to ignore.
The problem is that signing a “comprehensive economic cooperation pact” with China without agreeing on fundamental issues such as political matters could be dangerous. The Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) administration has yet to state clearly what it wants for Taiwan. This is becoming clearer to China and the US, as it is to the Taiwanese public.
Few Taiwanese media outlets seem to focus on substantial domestic issues; instead, stories on cross-strait and Chinese affairs proliferate, while recently the sinking of a Taiwanese boat off the Diaoyutai (釣魚台) islets by the Japanese coast guard has taken up most of the coverage.
A recent opinion poll by the TVBS cable news channel showed that government approval ratings have dropped to 41 percent; that 60 percent are dissatisfied with increasing inflation and that 45 percent disapprove of the handling of the Diaoyutais incident. Only the handling of ties with China gained higher approval at 60 percent.
This highlights the importance of the domestic issues that the public considers to be the most pressing. Higher prices, especially the rising cost of oil and food, are a priority.
There is an interest in maintaining the status quo — protecting the country’s democracy is part of this — and in bolstering economic growth. Yet the names “Taiwan” and “Taiwanese,” the issue of sovereignty, and for many eventual de jure independence, remain in the wings.
Establishing a broad pact with China on a number of issues could easily generate problems with many smaller issues in which meaning is clouded by ambiguity.
Taiwan should continue pursuing a constructive relationship with China, of course, but the results should be acceptable to Taiwanese.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS