To the public, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) “diplomatic truce” is all about showing China too much goodwill and offering too many compromises. The government is voluntarily restricting its freedom of movement without getting anything in return. This looks more like capitulation than a truce.
The advantage of Taiwan and China not pursuing each other’s diplomatic allies is that a lot of resources are saved, but it doesn’t mean that both sides gain equal benefits, since they are far from equal in terms of leverage. The loss of a few small diplomatic allies would not cost China much sleep, but for Taiwan, its tiny band of allies underpins its claims to statehood under international law. If Taiwan stops trying to develop diplomatic relationships, China will have a lot of room, while Taiwan will be moving one step closer to the edge.
Diplomacy is supposed to protect and promote Taiwan’s existence and dignity. Taiwan cannot afford to expose its national interests to so much risk or to try to measure the value of its sovereignty. Some things shouldn’t be sold because they are as valuable as life itself. There should never be the slightest hint at the possibility that Taiwan has tried to sell or exchange its sovereignty or even worse, give it away for free.
Sovereignty must not be a bargaining chip because that would put Taiwan on the road to extinction. Without the moral courage to insist on this point, even our self-respect will vanish. A country willing to use its sovereignty as a bargaining chip will not win the respect of its opponent, nor will it gain international support.
Taiwan’s effort to join the UN has also weakened noticeably, and it now seems to be a perfunctory matter. It was extremely disappointing to see both the Presidential Office and the Cabinet defend the oppressive comments by Chinese Ambassador to the UN Wang Guangya (王光亞) regarding Taiwan’s UN hopes, rather than showing some moral fiber and sticking to their position. China continues to use its carrot and stick approach, but all Taiwan has is a weak defense. Seeing this cowardly reaction, why should Beijing be bothered with anything Taiwan has to say? If Taiwan’s leaders are unwilling to speak up for the nation, its diplomatic allies are certain to stop speaking up on Taiwan’s behalf, too.
If both Taiwan and China want a cross-strait diplomatic truce, it is only right that the stronger party make some goodwill gestures first. Why should the weaker party make all the compromises? Since Taiwan is the underdog, it must act with utmost caution. The seesaw diplomatic battle over recognition may have come to a temporary halt, but Taiwan cannot give up its diplomatic efforts before having achieved some concrete results — that would be both dangerous and stupid.
The Ma administration is afraid of offending China and even more afraid of criticizing Beijing because any of its political achievements seem to be utterly dependent on Chinese cooperation. What’s worse, top decision makers seem to lack both idealism and theoretical grounding. Because they also are completely disconnected from reality, they appear weak and cowardly on one hand, and to be acting unilaterally on the other. Surrendering national sovereignty without getting anything in return and calling it “a show of goodwill” will only lead to the destruction of the nation.
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS