After decades of antagonism, China seems to have relented a bit to show goodwill toward Taiwan. Beijing has agreed to have Taiwanese observers attend a World Health Assembly (WHA) meeting, permitted a state-owned enterprise to invest in Taiwan and, for the first time, sent a researcher to a US military institute in Hawaii alongside colleagues from Taiwan. At the same time, Beijing appears to have turned up its belligerence toward the US by mounting five harassing assaults on US Navy ships in international waters off China’s coast in the last two months. Moreover, Beijing has declined to resume military exchanges with the US despite urgings by senior US officers.
Why the Chinese have adopted this apparent carrot-and-stick approach is a puzzle that can only lead to speculation. On the Taiwan issue, maybe Chinese leaders have figured out that their continued hostility toward Taiwan has driven people there further away rather than encourage them to join China. Nothing suggests, however, that Beijing has diluted its claim to Taiwan.
Or maybe they are trying to tamp down pro-Taiwan sentiment in the US Congress. The House of Representatives last month passed a resolution that “reaffirms its unwavering commitment to the Taiwan Relations Act,” which governs US political, economic and military affairs with Taiwan in place of diplomatic relations.
Taiwan has sought for years to expand what its diplomats call international space but has been blocked by Beijing. The WHA meeting in Geneva starting next Saturday is scheduled to have representatives from Taiwan there without a vote. The official Chinese press said Beijing was “allowing” Taiwan to come, underlining its attempt to assert Chinese control over Taiwan’s presence.
Bloomberg News has reported that China Mobile has agreed to buy a 12 percent share in Far EasTone Telecommunications, the first investment by a Chinese state-owned company in Taiwan. The US$529 million investment drove the Taiwan Stock Exchange to its biggest daily gain since 1991 amid speculation that it could spur more Chinese investments.
At the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu, where military officers and civilian officials from Asia and the US discuss non-military aspects of security, China has refused until now to take part as long as Taiwan was represented there. A Chinese researcher is now attending an anti-terrorist course with a naval officer and a civilian official from Taiwan.
On the downside, on May 1 two Chinese fishing vessels closed on the surveillance ship Victorious in the Yellow Sea 274km off the coast where China maintains a major naval base at Qingdao. The Chinese maneuvered in what a Pentagon spokesman asserted was “an unsafe manner.” The Victorious crew sprayed water at the Chinese vessels with fire hoses to prevent the Chinese from boarding.
China has been building a deepwater fleet but is not yet a match for the US Navy and thus appears to be resorting to maritime guerrilla tactics, drawing on the tradition of the People’s Liberation Army, which fought Japanese invaders in World War II and Chinese Nationalist forces in the civil war that followed.
To preclude escalation, US officials — including Jeffrey Bader, a specialist on Asia in the National Security Council staff, Admiral Gary Roughead, chief of naval operations, and Admiral Timothy Keating, head of Pacific Command — have urged China to resume military exchanges they broke off last October after the US announced a US$5.6 billion arms sale to Taiwan.
A staff officer at Pacific Command said: “This latest confrontation is another example of why communication between both sides is imperative.”
Richard Halloran is a freelance writer in Hawaii.
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
The National Development Council (NDC) on Wednesday last week launched a six-month “digital nomad visitor visa” program, the Central News Agency (CNA) reported on Monday. The new visa is for foreign nationals from Taiwan’s list of visa-exempt countries who meet financial eligibility criteria and provide proof of work contracts, but it is not clear how it differs from other visitor visas for nationals of those countries, CNA wrote. The NDC last year said that it hoped to attract 100,000 “digital nomads,” according to the report. Interest in working remotely from abroad has significantly increased in recent years following improvements in
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or