The severing of diplomatic relations with Panama is a sign that the diplomatic truce that was a result of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) recognition of the so-called “1992 consensus” has come to a screeching halt.
China will now put huge pressure on Taiwan and its diplomatic allies, and the nation should prepare itself for a hard landing.
China’s diplomatic battle against Taiwan is not intended to bring external pressure, but to stir up domestic trouble. If everyone starts to point fingers, criticize the purity of their opponents’ national identity and discuss whether to accept the “1992 consensus” whenever an ally severs diplomatic relations, China will develop a taste for it.
On the other hand, if external pressure begets greater unity and a more unified approach to the outside world by Taiwanese, inciting allies to break diplomatic relations with Taiwan would not make much sense to Beijing.
China is continuously pressing President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) to accept the “1992 consensus” and it is trying to drive a wedge between the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), as well as between Tsai and Taiwanese. It is convinced that if Tsai relents, the public will be willing to accept the “one China” principle.
However, reality is different: The reason Tsai cannot accept the “1992 consensus” is because Taiwanese do not accept it.
If Tsai went against public opinion, the DPP government would collapse just like the KMT government before it. No elected government would commit suicide in this way.
Although the Tsai administration remains silent on cross-strait relations and diplomatic affairs, local government leaders are more outspoken.
Be it the view of Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) — who is to go to Shanghai for a cross-strait forum early next month — that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are “one family,” Tainan Mayor William Lai’s (賴清德) talk about “affinity with China and love for Taiwan,” Taoyuan Mayor Cheng Wen-tsan’s (鄭文燦) view that Taiwan should “reconcile with China and love Taiwan,” or Taichung Mayor Lin Chia-lung’s (林佳龍) suggestion that we should be “friendly toward China and love Taiwan,” everyone is looking for a way to interact with China.
Whether Taiwan can find more time and flexibility in the extremely unfavorable situation will not depend on Tsai’s acceptance of the “1992 consensus,” but on changes in the international situation and the cross-strait geopolitical relationship, as well as on how highly Taiwanese value their way of life, human rights and freedom, and how willing they are to protect them.
The international situation and the cross-strait geopolitical relationship might not be decided by Taiwanese, but they are in charge of protecting their collective way of life.
The more united Taiwanese are and the more determined to protect their way of life, the higher the cost to China, regardless of how it seeks to control Taiwan. That would give the nation more time.
However, the opposite also holds true.
Freedom, democracy and human rights are the most powerful weapons Taiwanese have to oppose China’s threats. Without democracy, Taiwan has no future, and democracy without unity also spells doom.
This is why the suggestions of local government leaders are not an attack on the government and Tsai, but a diverse defense aimed at exploring all possibilities, because the final decision is not in the hands of local government leaders or the president — it is a decision to be democratically made by all Taiwanese.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
After the coup in Burma in 2021, the country’s decades-long armed conflict escalated into a full-scale war. On one side was the Burmese army; large, well-equipped, and funded by China, supported with weapons, including airplanes and helicopters from China and Russia. On the other side were the pro-democracy forces, composed of countless small ethnic resistance armies. The military junta cut off electricity, phone and cell service, and the Internet in most of the country, leaving resistance forces isolated from the outside world and making it difficult for the various armies to coordinate with one another. Despite being severely outnumbered and
RSS