In 2011, Taiwan and Hong Kong reached an agreement that the nation’s representative office in Hong Kong should be named the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office, forgoing the sensitive terms “Taiwan” and “Republic of China (ROC)” to be able to exchange documents for the mutual benefit of Taiwan and Hong Kong, and to provide services to their citizens.
When the Hong Kong government made agreeing to the “one China” principle a condition for issuing work permits to Taiwanese staff at the office, it left the Mainland Affairs Council with no option but to refuse signing a document that belittles Taiwan’s national dignity.
The same thing has been going on in Hong Kong for a long time. Ever since Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) took office, Hong Kong’s communist government has taken a zero-sum approach to handling matters. For example, civil servants — who take neutral stances in their jobs — must swear allegiance to the territory’s government or lose their jobs.
The same approach is used against Hong Kong’s democratic alliance, Next Media and even banks and businesses; everyone is forced to choose between totalitarianism and democracy. Choosing democracy, of course, results in being punished by the Chinese Communist Party.
Over the past few months, all demonstrations and gatherings have been banned in Hong Kong, and freedom of expression has been restricted. Apart from showing that Hong Kong has turned deeply “red” and that any talk of Hong Kong enjoying “a high degree of freedom” is empty, these pathological methods have also cut off all communication channels between civil society and the government, and blocked every outlet for public anger.
The situation can only become increasingly polarized. As Hong Kongers who have not been able to emigrate are forced to choose between a life of slavery and revolution, brutal police suppression of public discontent and complaints only causes that discontent and those complaints to boil over again. When that happens, protests are no longer peaceful.
A gray area can provide flexibility when handling problems, and a space for communication and mediation. China does not understand the importance of this gray area. It treats everything as black or white, and even extends this dualistic approach to diplomacy.
Media have reported that China, in complete disregard of diplomatic protocol and international rules, has listed 14 complaints against Australia and threatened to treat the country as an enemy. Left with only two options — silently accept humiliation or strike back — Australia, of course, chose to make the issue public and strike back together with the G7 member states.
If China continues to handle issues by blocking every channel of communication, as well as every other possibility, the only option left to the world will, in the end, be war. Is this really what China wants?
Hong Tsun-ming is the director of the Taiwan Statebuilding Party’s Yilan County Branch.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS