Since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) took office last year, 17 members of the US House of Representatives and two governors — but no senators — have visited Taiwan. Yet senators are leading political figures, and considering that several presidents were at one time senators, inviting them to visit and learn about Taiwan has always been a focus of diplomatic efforts.
Ma’s government has done poorly in this regard. One possibility is that the US is suspicious of the government’s pro-China stance, making senators hesitant to visit. Another possibility is that the government is not interested in bolstering ties with the US and has therefore not invited senators to come.
Ma has proposed a “diplomatic truce” to promote cross-strait peace talks and end the diplomatic competition between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. Taiwan’s sovereignty is now in a “diplomatic coma.”
For more than a year, the government has distanced itself from friends and treated a China that wants to annex it as a good friend. Its policies can be summed up with the slogan: “Cross-strait relations transcend all else.” Thus the government fails to distinguish between friend and foe. This is key to the nation’s sovereignty crisis.
In addition to the US, the government has distanced itself from Japan despite Tokyo’s friendly policies toward Taiwan and concern for Taiwan’s security.
The government has echoed Beijing by insisting on sovereignty over the Diaoyutai islands. When Japanese Representative to Taiwan Masaki Saito said in May that Taiwan’s status was undetermined, he meant to make clear that Taiwanese sovereignty is not in China’s hands. Yet Ma and Minister of Foreign Affairs Francisco Ou (歐鴻鍊) have punished Saito by refusing to meet him since then, thus damaging Taiwan’s traditional friendship with Tokyo.
The government seems to harbor a historical hatred of Japan, but its negative attitude is very different from the public’s.
Ma is nevertheless not afraid of offending Japan or disregarding public opinion because Beijing is behind him.
Ma reserves his warmth for China. When Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) visited in November, his administration oppressed protesters and banned them from displaying the national flag and playing Taiwanese songs. This, to curry favor with his Chinese guest.
Taiwan also obtained Chinese approval through murky channels to participate in the World Health Assembly (WHA) as an observer under the name “Chinese Taipei.” The arrangement implies Taiwan is subject to China’s control and requires Beijing’s approval for participation in international organizations and activities.
Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊) says Beijing was opposed to Ma attending the World Games, yet Ma praised Beijing’s “goodwill” in connection with the event.
Ma does not value Taiwan’s allies. He claims he has put an end to “cash diplomacy,” yet China is continuing the practice.
The Presidential Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs have said they do not mind if Taiwan’s allies pursue interaction with China, but that dual recognition would be unacceptable.
The government seems not to mind if its diplomatic allies switch recognition to China and is uninterested in seeking dual recognition.
Ma’s “diplomatic truce” is likely to drive away all of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies. As China’s international blockade tightens, Taiwan will eventually become a special administrative region of China.
Ma’s “diplomatic truce” is harmful to Taiwan and its people, yet Ma favors it, because by belittling Taiwanese sovereignty in the international community and catering to the “one China” principle, Ma hopes China will offer rewards as he opens up cross-strait economic links. That would help Ma improve his poor performance.
Ma knows that China’s “united front” strategy includes economic links that are sugarcoated poison. He knows that Taiwan’s fate after taking this medicine will be gradual economic and political paralysis leading to annexation by China without resistance.
The “diplomatic truce” and “eventual unification” are two sides of the same coin. The benefits of cross-strait detente cannot be measured without weighing the risk of ultimate unification.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
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