“Harmonious” or not, China’s rise has become a virtual reality for the empire’s neighbors. China’s recent actions in the South China Sea and toward Japan have led several Asian countries to consider the US as a welcome guardian in Asia. China’s recent military displays have created a new strategic opportunity for the US that can strengthen democratic forces in Asia and attract new friends.
It is therefore paradoxical that the EU appears to have failed to behave as an international leader by embracing China’s censorship. A few days before Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波) was declared the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, the EU apparently limited press freedom in an embarrassing event involving two China-critical media, the Epoch Times and New Tang Dynasty Television. Both media were denied access to a press conference between the EU and China in what looks like a quiet agreement with China. Access was allowed when other media interacted, but the press conference was subsequently canceled.
A coincidence? Hardly. The Epoch Times and New Tang Dynasty Television are just too critical of China.
Apparently, the EU prefers that China set the agenda for press freedom instead of the EU drawing the famous line in the sand. The EU is therefore revealing itself to be an embarrassing and spineless international institution that puts fundamental core values up for sale. It is not difficult to draw a direct link to China’s shopping spree in the 10 crisis-hit southern European countries, like Italy and Greece.
Now that democracies are weakening, according to Freedom House, it is essential that the EU and the US set a clear and uncompromising democratic agenda because democratic allies in Asia and around the world are far better alternatives for a sustainable future. The authoritarian forces that impede democratic development must be challenged by supporting democracies in a way that helps them grow stronger in cooperation with EU and the US.
Taiwan remains a prime example of a democratic success story in Asia, yet the EU still fears to support it because China claims ownership of Taiwan. For a start, the EU should stop bowing its head to China and start demonstrating international leadership by taking advantage of Taiwan’s independent membership in the WTO to conclude a free-trade agreement with the nation, just as the EU has done with South Korea.
The point is that China must be held accountable for international agreements. In addition, the EU should allow its leaders to meet officially with all of Taiwan’s leaders. This will create an open dialogue that prevents misunderstandings caused by messages being filtered through several diplomatic channels. Later, a new Taiwan policy should be created that abandons the outdated “one China” policy and instead embraces the right of Taiwanese to determine their own future.
China is not yet a responsible nation that can strengthen democracies and the international order. Rather, it is an undemocratic country with ambitions for world power. Therefore the EU must stand strong on democratic development because the alternative is a world dominated by undemocratic forces.
Michael Danielsen is the chairman of Taiwan Corner.
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
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
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,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS