The recent anti-China disturbances in Vietnam have inadvertently laid bare a very weak point in the policies of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) government. Its rapprochement with China has — in the eyes of many observers — blurred the distinction between Taiwan and China, leading some Vietnamese to attack Taiwan-owned companies under the assumption that they were Chinese.
It of course does not help that the government in Taipei calls itself the “Republic of China,” and Ma himself continues to emphasize that Taiwan and “the mainland” are part of “one China.”
The Vietnamese demonstrators could also be forgiven that they are confused when the main airline flying from Hanoi to Taipei is named “China Airlines,” and one of the bigger investors from Taiwan carries the title “China Steel Corp.”
So, it is clear that the confusion is primarily caused by the policies of the government in Taipei.
However, it is also important to address the immediate cause that triggered the Vietnamese protests: Chinese aggression against Vietnam.
Earlier this month, China moved a huge oil drilling platform to disputed waters near the Paracel Islands (Xisha Islands, 西沙群島), well within the 321km exclusive economic zone claimed by Vietnam in accordance with the international Law of the Sea.
China made this move after a number of prior provocative moves in the region, including the declaration of an air defense identification zone over the disputed Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台群島) — known as the Senkakus in Japan — in the East China Sea in November last year, the restriction of fishing by other nations in international waters in the South China Sea in January of this year and harassment against Vietnamese fishermen and atoll groups claimed by the Philippines.
The dispatch of the oil platform was called “extremely provocative” by US Secretary of State John Kerry in a telephone call to his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi (王毅) on Tuesday last week.
So, what has been the reaction from the government in Taipei to this pattern of assertiveness from the Chinese side?
On Thursday last week, Minister of Foreign Affairs David Lin (林永樂) was quoted as saying that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government had rejected a call for cooperation from Beijing, but at the same time pledged “not to take sides” in the dispute.
However, the government did not say a word on the provocative steps taken by China in sending an oil rig to the area and deploying almost 100 coast guard and People’s Liberation Army Navy vessels to “protect” the oil rig from Vietnamese ships.
The peculiar thing is that the Ma administration itself still claims the Paracels and even aligns itself with Beijing in claiming everything within the “nine-dash line,” which basically covers just about all of the South China Sea.
So, with this kind of ambivalent policy emanating from Taipei, one cannot fault other countries and people who wonder which side Taiwan is on.
What should Taipei do to clarify its position and prevent a situation in the future in which its businesses in Vietnam or any other country are mistaken for being Chinese?
It must emphasize Taiwanese identity and clearly express that there is a free and democratic Taiwan that is not associated with a repressive and expansionist People’s Republic of China.
For starters, China Airlines should be renamed to show that it is a Taiwanese airline, while state-owned companies like China Steel should proudly carry Taiwan’s name.
Chen Mei-chin is a commentator based in Washington.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS