Modus vivendi remains the unwavering strategy of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration on cross-strait issues — to the point of brushing aside the diplomatic reality.
In an exclusive interview with the Taipei Times on Wednesday, Ma dismissed the idea that Taiwan should be considered anything but a normal country. The nation governs itself, the president said, and with 23 allies and diplomatic offices in another 87 countries, “our relations with those countries are not any less than a UN member state enjoys.”
Let’s talk quality, not quantity. A UN member state can count on its normal status and the help of other countries and international organizations in ways that Taiwan cannot. That is a lesson Taiwan learned during the SARS outbreak, when it was isolated from the help of WHO experts until the crisis had almost completely run its course.
“Normal” and “independent” are not one and the same. That this nation is independent is clear. What Taiwan seeks at this point is the international community’s concern for its security. With no hope of winning recognition in any context from China — the sole threat to the nation’s sovereignty — we must ensure that Taiwan is part of an international network that respects its independence and the rights of its people to representation at key global bodies.
While insisting the nation has already achieved normality, Ma said relations with China remained abnormal in terms of finance and trade. In this context, he was ready to portray the country as still in the process of normalization: “Do you think we are a normal country if our ships are required to make detours to a third country [to reach China]?”
Normalizing economic ties with China does not constitute normalizing the country. No amount of negotiation with Beijing over trade and financial mechanisms will win room on the issue of Taiwan’s future, nor gain it recognition from other governments. It is this point that triggers concern that the government’s cross-strait policies could further constrain Taiwan by leaving it overly dependent on China’s economy without addressing Taiwan’s status as a country.
Ma is not concerned that Beijing is seeking to control Taiwan through political and economic weapons. The president dismissed the argument that there are dangers in depending on China, saying: “We have not seen any attempts by communist China to force Taiwan to do things we cannot accept,” nor “have we lost the freedom to make decisions.”
Ma said Taiwanese must have confidence in the nation’s strengths, including democracy and human rights, which help keep the playing field level. That these are invaluable goes without saying, and they have won respect and sympathy abroad for Taiwan in the face of an obnoxious neighbor. However, it would be foolish to think these things in themselves have the power to obstruct Beijing’s plans for unification.
Nor should we pretend that a “diplomatic truce” with China has weakened Beijing’s aggressive agenda. Ma said that Beijing was tacitly adhering to this “truce” and that this would allow Taiwan to pursue economic opportunities and greater international participation, while preventing its remaining allies from changing sides. This is possible, Ma argued, because Beijing and Taiwan are refraining from engaging “in vicious attacks,” which he called “fruitless efforts.”
While Ma noted that such attacks have not helped Taiwan in recent years, he did not mention that the strategy has paid handsome dividends for Beijing. China has added to its list of allies and squeezed Taiwan’s voice internationally.
This, if nothing else, illustrates the chronically precarious situation of a country that Ma calls “normal.”
A return to power for former US president Donald Trump would pose grave risks to Taiwan’s security, autonomy and the broader stability of the Indo-Pacific region. The stakes have never been higher as China aggressively escalates its pressure on Taiwan, deploying economic, military and psychological tactics aimed at subjugating the nation under Beijing’s control. The US has long acted as Taiwan’s foremost security partner, a bulwark against Chinese expansionism in the region. However, a second Trump presidency could upend decades of US commitments, introducing unpredictability that could embolden Beijing and severely compromise Taiwan’s position. While president, Trump’s foreign policy reflected a transactional
There appears to be a growing view among leaders and leading thinkers in Taiwan that their words and actions have no influence over how China approaches cross-Strait relations. According to this logic, China’s actions toward Taiwan are guided by China’s unwavering ambition to assert control over Taiwan. Many also believe Beijing’s approach is influenced by China’s domestic politics. As the thinking goes, former President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) made a good faith effort to demonstrate her moderation on cross-Strait issues throughout her tenure. During her 2016 inaugural address, Tsai sent several constructive signals, including by acknowledging the historical fact of interactions and
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has prioritized modernizing the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to rival the US military, with many experts believing he would not act on Taiwan until the PLA is fully prepared to confront US forces. At the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th Party Congress in 2022, Xi emphasized accelerating this modernization, setting 2027 — the PLA’s centennial — as the new target, replacing the previous 2035 goal. US intelligence agencies said that Xi has directed the PLA to be ready for a potential invasion of Taiwan by 2027, although no decision on launching an attack had been made. Whether
HSBC Holdings successfully fought off a breakup campaign by disgruntled Asian investors in recent years. Now, it has announced a restructuring along almost the same east-west lines. The obvious question is why? It says it is designed to create a simpler, more efficient and dynamic company. However, it looks a lot like the bank is also facing up to the political reality of the growing schism between the US and China. A new structure would not dissolve HSBC’s geopolitical challenges, but it could give the bank better options to respond quickly if things worsen. HSBC spent 2022 battling to convince shareholders of
RSS