During a recent question-and-answer session at the Legislative Yuan, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Tsai Huang-liang (蔡煌瑯) asked Premier Mao Chi-kuo (毛治國) whether the government would issue a visa to the Dalai Lama, who said he would be very happy to visit Taiwan when he received a group of Taiwanese religious representatives on March 16 in Dharamsala, India.
Mao tried to avoid Tsai’s question, claiming that the government would make a decision acceptable to “both parties.”
What kind of answer is that? Does the government need to ask for Beijing’s permission?
A visit by the Dalai Lama would be in line with the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution and show respect for Tibet’s autonomous spirit. It would also promote Taiwan’s international image, especially at a time when the controversy over the Dalai Lama’s next reincarnation is in the news.
In an interview with German newspaper Welt am Sonntag in September last year, the Dalai Lama said he would not be reincarnated. He also told international media this month that he would announce the end of his reincarnation cycle on the eve of his 80th birthday in July, making him the last incarnation of the Dalai Lama. Unexpectedly, this infuriated Beijing, which said that he has no right to end the reincarnation cycle, that doing it like this is a double betrayal and demanded that he continue to be reincarnated according to Beijing’s conditions.
In response, Reuters quoted Tibetan government-in-exile Prime Minister Lobsang Sangay as saying that “for China to find a successor to the Dalai Lama would be like former Cuban leader Fidel Castro choosing the pope.”
Columbia University’s first professor of modern Tibetan studies Gray Tuttle said that reincarnation is only meaningful to the Dalai Lama’s followers and is none of the Chinese Communist Party’s business.
CNN also reported that for the sake of Tibetan independence and freedom, the Dalai Lama, which means “ocean of wisdom” in the Tibetan language, is now wrestling with the Chinese authorities by terminating the traditional succession system.
Perhaps Mao is unfamiliar with the relationship between the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama and the ROC. Article 2 of the government’s regulations on the management of lama temples (管理喇嘛寺廟條例), which were enacted in 1935 and abolished in 2003, stated that reincarnations are restricted to lamas who have been reincarnated before; lamas who had not been reincarnated before would not be seen as reincarnations without the central government’s approval. The article was suspended in 1973 because it was out of date, and the whole law was abolished in 2003. The ROC has a more enlightened attitude than the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as it respects the uniqueness of Tibetan politics, culture, religion, language and social structure.
In the face of the dispute over the Dalai Lama’s reincarnation, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration should have displayed some political stature and invited the exiled spiritual leader to visit Taiwan, so that the ROC could compete with the PRC on the world stage and actively demonstrate its determination to implement its understanding of the “one China” policy, which is that “each side has its own interpretation” of the meaning of that policy. However, the Ma administration emasculated itself, and one can only wonder if it is trying to prove that the so-called “1992 consensus” means “one China” without any individual interpretations.
At a time when Beijing and Washington are constantly pressuring Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) to accept the “1992 consensus,” it is not appropriate for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to follow suit and insist on a concrete implementation of “one China, with each side having its own interpretation.”
According to a 2013 TVBS poll, 71 percent of the public support Taiwanese independence. Another poll conducted by the University of Hong Kong this year showed that 51 percent of young people in Hong Kong aged between 18 and 29 supported Taiwanese independence. The results show that the Ma administration’s policy of “one China, with each side having its own interpretation” will neither convince young people nor attract any votes. A visit by the Dalai Lama to Taiwan would serve as an opportunity for the ROC to concretely declare its existence, and the nation should seize the chance.
Lu I-ming is the former publisher and president of the Taiwan Shin Sheng Daily News.
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
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