International and domestic media have devoted a great deal of column space this week to whether Taiwan should write off the debt owed to it by Haiti in the wake of the devastating earthquake that struck its impoverished Caribbean ally on Jan. 12.
Taiwan has already done its fair share, sending rescue teams to search for survivors, donating US$5 million and shipping 70 tonnes of humanitarian supplies to the quake-affected area, while several non-governmental organizations have also announced aid packages and medical missions.
The focus now, however, has switched to whether Taipei will follow the lead of the IMF and a host of countries, which last year canceled large portions of Haiti’s debt. The discussions were spurred by calls this week from the Paris Club for Haiti’s remaining creditors to cancel debts.
Haiti has long been a failed state, with debt problems that stretch back to when the country’s slaves defeated Napoleon’s troops and declared independence from France in 1804. Decades of interference, misrule and plundering of state coffers by a succession of dictators and corrupt rulers have contributed to the failure of Haiti. Last week’s events only served to highlight the shocking state of a nation that has long been ignored, while causing nations around the globe to finally take notice and ponder what can be done to help.
At about US$90 million, Haiti’s debt to Taiwan is not overwhelming. Taiwan can afford to forgive this debt, which would help the ravaged nation get back on its feet.
Whether it would have the desired effect remains to be seen.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has already indicated that a total writeoff will not be simple because the money is owed to several banks, not the government. The president added that he has instructed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to investigate what can be done.
However, domestic critics have argued that forgiving Haiti’s debt would encourage Taiwan’s mostly poor allies to expect the same treatment, something they say the nation can’t afford. Others, however, argue that the sheer scale of the disaster in Haiti and its vacuum of good governance distinguishes it from all of Taiwan’s other allies, making a compelling case for an act of goodwill.
If Taipei is worried about what will happen to its ties with Haiti in the face of a growing Chinese threat to its relations in the region, then it could tie the writeoff to reconstruction contracts and an increase in medical and agricultural assistance.
Speculation is rife that Ma will make an announcement during a rumored meeting that is to take place with his Haitian counterpart Rene Preval during his stop in the Dominican Republic next week.
Ma may see this as an opportunity to gain good publicity, but whatever kind of deal is struck, it should not be made as part of a cheerleading effort for our beleaguered president and should be carried out in as low-key a manner as possible. To do otherwise would be an embarrassment to Taiwan and the ultimate mark of disrespect to victims in Haiti.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS