On Saturday the Dalai Lama made a quiet statement of desperation, signaling the frustration of decades of failed efforts to win fair treatment for Tibetans living within China’s borders.
“As far as I’m concerned, I’ve given up,” reports quoted the Dalai Lama as saying, referring to his attempts to engage Beijing in meaningful talks on human rights abuses and the lack of autonomy in Tibet.
With these heartbreaking words, the exiled spiritual leader conceded what independent observers have long recognized: Beijing has not and will not move one inch on Tibet.
For all the differences between Taiwan, a sovereign country, and Tibet, which has been controlled by the People’s Republic of China since 1951, the Taiwanese public can no doubt sympathize with the Dalai Lama’s distress. Beijing brands any stand for the ideals of human rights and self-determination as dangerous, “splittist” and a provocation. Peaceful actions are scorned and cited by Beijing as sedition deserving of military retaliation — whether in the form of deploying missiles in the Taiwan Strait or cracking down on Tibetan demonstrations.
While Beijing time and again blames the lack of dialogue over Tibet on the Dalai Lama, likewise, Taiwan has been repeatedly labeled the provocateur across the Strait. Thus, the two UN referendums held in conjunction with the presidential election in March drew much saber rattling from Beijing.
Despite all the talk of detente, it is amply clear that China has no intention of budging on its claim to Taiwan. On that front, nothing has changed since the shift from a Democratic Progressive Party to a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) administration in May, nor can we expect to see any progress.
Taiwan, as a sovereign country with control over its borders and economy, has more bargaining power than Tibet, where dissent is met with aggressive reprisals. In spite of this, the nation has nothing more than the Dalai Lama to show for extending olive branches to Beijing. This was confirmed when Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Vice Chairman Zhang Mingqing (張銘清) said during his brief visit that China would not give up Taiwan without war.
President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) critics argue that his goodwill toward Beijing has yet to be reciprocated on any level. A single, meager gesture of “goodwill” from Beijing came days ago when it belatedly apologized for the tonnes of melamine-tainted products it has exported to Taiwan. It would seem Beijing is worried about the future of its exports to Taiwan — or disturbed by anti-China sentiment fed by that scandal.
But as for the nation’s status and international diplomacy, China remains incapable of discussing Taiwan’s future without brandishing its missile arsenal.
For his many years of promoting a peaceful dialogue and human rights in Tibet, the Dalai Lama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. But from Beijing, he walks away empty-handed, accused of inciting riots and supporting terrorism.
As our own government pursues a dialogue with Beijing, it is unclear why we should expect results that are any better.
Would China attack Taiwan during the American lame duck period? For months, there have been worries that Beijing would seek to take advantage of an American president slowed by age and a potentially chaotic transition to make a move on Taiwan. In the wake of an American election that ended without drama, that far-fetched scenario will likely prove purely hypothetical. But there is a crisis brewing elsewhere in Asia — one with which US president-elect Donald Trump may have to deal during his first days in office. Tensions between the Philippines and China in the South China Sea have been at
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s hypersonic missile carried a simple message to the West over Ukraine: Back off, and if you do not, Russia reserves the right to hit US and British military facilities. Russia fired a new intermediate-range hypersonic ballistic missile known as “Oreshnik,” or Hazel Tree, at Ukraine on Thursday in what Putin said was a direct response to strikes on Russia by Ukrainian forces with US and British missiles. In a special statement from the Kremlin just after 8pm in Moscow that day, the Russian president said the war was escalating toward a global conflict, although he avoided any nuclear
A nation has several pillars of national defense, among them are military strength, energy and food security, and national unity. Military strength is very much on the forefront of the debate, while several recent editorials have dealt with energy security. National unity and a sense of shared purpose — especially while a powerful, hostile state is becoming increasingly menacing — are problematic, and would continue to be until the nation’s schizophrenia is properly managed. The controversy over the past few days over former navy lieutenant commander Lu Li-shih’s (呂禮詩) usage of the term “our China” during an interview about his attendance
Bo Guagua (薄瓜瓜), the son of former Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee Politburo member and former Chongqing Municipal Communist Party secretary Bo Xilai (薄熙來), used his British passport to make a low-key entry into Taiwan on a flight originating in Canada. He is set to marry the granddaughter of former political heavyweight Hsu Wen-cheng (許文政), the founder of Luodong Poh-Ai Hospital in Yilan County’s Luodong Township (羅東). Bo Xilai is a former high-ranking CCP official who was once a challenger to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for the chairmanship of the CCP. That makes Bo Guagua a bona fide “third-generation red”
RSS