The fourth meeting between Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) and Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) begins today.
Even before Chiang and Chen meet, the government has mobilized a large number of police and soldiers and tried to persuade shops near the venue to close. The opposition is mobilizing support from around the nation to demonstrate their opposition to Chen and some have even said they would “capture him alive.”
The opposition is tense and the atmosphere is reminiscent of the situation surrounding the meeting between Chiang and Chen in Taipei in November last year.
Why is everyone so tense?
Most people probably don’t even know what the four issues to be discussed are — cross-strait cooperation on quarantine inspection of agricultural products, avoiding double taxation, cooperation on measurement and inspection certification and cooperation on cross-strait fishing boat crew services.
These are in fact quite unremarkable routine issues that very few people pay any attention to. Nor will Chiang and Chen spend any time discussing these matters because they were basically decided at the previous meeting. Signing the agreements is more or less a matter of formality.
If no one cares about these agreements, then what is upsetting the government and the public?
This concern highlights the lack of trust between the government and the opposition. The government worries that it will be unable to control the public and that the scenes from last year will be repeated.
The Chinese-language Commonwealth Magazine released an opinion poll showing that 61 percent of respondents worry that the government’s economic policy relies too heavily on China and 66 percent are displeased with President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). Despite these figures, the government monopolizes cross-strait policy. Neither the opposition nor the popularly elected legislature can interfere.
Legislative reviews of previous agreements were all delayed by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) on technical grounds and in the end went into effect by default. In the same way, all calls for referendums on important cross-strait agreements are falling on deaf ears.
The public has not been asked about important cross-strait agreements, either in direct referendums or through indirect consultation. Long pent up public concern has reached boiling point.
Chen’s visit to Taiwan provides a good opportunity for the public to vent their discontent and Chen may have to bear the brunt of their unhappiness with Ma’s high-handed ways and China’s overbearing attitude. In particular, the government’s unwillingness to explain what an economic cooperation and framework agreement (ECFA) entails and its stubborn insistence on signing it is causing public suspicion and fear, further strengthening people’s determination to display their discontent.
So long as the government does not fear exposing Chen to the national flag and so long as police do not use undue force and place too many restrictions on demonstrations, any protests that remain within what is legally permitted will likely end peacefully.
Following the government’s dismal performance in the recent local elections, they should be well aware of public dissatisfaction with government policy and its attitude. The government should cast off its elitism, take a good look at the demonstrations and listen to why the public is opposed to the meeting and why an ECFA worries them.
If the government does that, it will understand why the public does not support Ma’s China policies.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS