The recent opening to China by President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration is generally described by the Western press as a positive development and hailed by the governments of the US and other nations as a step to reduce tension and a basis for longer-term stability in the Taiwan Strait.
However, one needs to look again at the actors and actions and see what is really happening. Even before Ma’s inauguration on May 20, his emissaries were speeding headlong toward China to lay the groundwork for these changes. In mid-April, then vice president-elect Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) attended the Boao Forum in Hainan, briefly met with Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), but was otherwise treated like the provincial chief of one of China’s outlying provinces.
Then at the end of May, right after the inauguration, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Party Chairman Wu Po-hsiung (吳伯雄) led a delegation to Nanjing and Beijing, also met with Hu, but couldn’t bring himself to call Ma “President” and only referred to him as “Mr Ma.” He also didn’t dare to refer to Taiwan as the “Republic of China” (ROC), a curious about-face in view of the fact that within Taiwan, the KMT is now insisting on not referring to Taiwan as “Taiwan” but as the “ROC.”
The third event was the first round of talks between the two semi-official organizations representing the two countries — the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) for Taiwan and the Association for Relations across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) for China. This led to the agreement to allow weekend charter flights and Chinese tourists starting last weekend.
While these developments seem innocuous and are presented as first steps in the direction of a general reduction of tension between the two sides, there are significant reasons for concern on a number of fronts.
First, the Ma administration did not attempt to achieve any consensus in Taiwan before recklessly rushing ahead into its adventure with China. It did so without any consultations with either the DPP — which received some 37 percent of the votes in the legislative election and 41 percent of the votes in the presidential election — or with the Legislative Yuan itself. No wonder that in a recent interview with the Liberty Times, Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) cautioned that there were three things requiring attention. First, national sovereignty must be ensured. Second, national security must be protected, and third, the rights of the 23 million Taiwanese must be protected. He urged the Ma administration to submit a comprehensive proposal to the legislature. This hasn’t happened yet.
Second, the Ma administration has hitched itself inextricably to the goodwill of the Beijing regime. He has mentioned the reduction of the missile threat and more “international space” for Taiwan as desirable, but he has little leverage. If Beijing doesn’t deliver or only makes token moves, Ma has little room to maneuver and is dead in the water.
Third, Ma has zigzagged on the issue of arms sales from the US. There were earlier reports that right after the inauguration the Ma administration had urged the US to slow down the timing of the notifications of arms sales. Subsequent reports indicated that the Ma administration had not initiated a freeze in the sales. Be that as it may, the fact remains that from 2002 to last year, the KMT opposition did everything possible to sabotage the US-offered arms package by blocking even a discussion in the Legislative Yuan, thereby undermining Taiwan’s security.
Fourth, by allowing Taiwan to drift into China’s orbit and sphere of influence, the US risks losing an important friend and ally in the region. Taiwan’s strategic location astride the major sea lanes from Japan and Korea to Southeast Asia makes it an important asset in support of free shipping and free trade. The US needs to set clear markers and red lines that — if crossed — would represent a threat to US interests.
Fifth, by linking Taiwan’s economy so much closer to China’s, Ma has placed Taiwan at risk of being pulled down in the event of a severe downturn in the Chinese economy. The current near-recession in the US will undoubtedly have severe repercussions on China’s economy. The first indicators are already there — a 50 percent drop in the Shanghai stock market during the past half year and hundreds, if not thousands, of Taiwanese companies in places like Shenzhen folding or moving to other countries like Vietnam.
So, if Ma is wise, he would follow a more prudent approach, based on first developing an internal consensus in Taiwan on how to move ahead, consultations with the US and Japan on security and strategic boundary conditions, and diversifying Taiwan’s economic and political links with the international community.
Only if he works along these lines will he be able to negotiate from a position of strength. The present approach will only lead to Taiwan being pushed into a corner from which it will be very difficult to extract itself. The Taiwanese people who have worked so hard for democracy deserve better.
Gerrit van der Wees is editor of Taiwan Communique, a publication based in Washington.
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
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS