Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman Joanne Ou (歐江安) on Monday called accusations against Taiwan by Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare “irresponsible” after Sogavare claimed that riots in his nation were initiated by “Taiwan’s agents.”
Sogavare, who has been accused of graft, should see the riots as a sign that he is an unpopular leader, and that his decision to sever ties with Taiwan was made against the wishes of his people.
There were concerns about Sogavare’s leadership even before opposition leader Matthew Wale initiated a no-confidence vote. In November last year, Sogavare moved to ban Facebook due to alleged Chinese influence, after the platform was used to criticize Sogavare’s administration and organize protests.
While Taiwan should continue to show concern for the people of the Solomon Islands and should welcome them to Taiwan, it need not be concerned about maintaining exchanges with the country’s government if it does not share Taiwan’s democratic values. Nor should it be compelled to respond to allegations made by such a government.
On Sept. 18, 2019, just after Honiara cut ties with Taipei, the ministry received messages from Solomon Islanders lamenting the decision by their government, which the ministry posted on Facebook. The riots, which aimed to see Sogavare resign and the ties with Taipei reinstated, show that Solomon Islanders’ sentiments toward Taiwan have not changed. They also point to an administration that is still not acting in the interest of its people.
In comparison, Palau is a like-minded ally with which Taiwan can resolve issues constructively. After Palauan President Surangel Whipps Jr on Nov. 19 said that China Airlines was “poisoning” his country’s tourism market by canceling its flights to the country last month, the state-owned carrier said it would resume flights this month.
Taiwan must focus its efforts on maintaining good relations with fellow democracies, particularly those such as Palau that have shunned income from Chinese tourists in favor of maintaining ties with Taiwan — with both sharing concern for the environment, sustainability, public health and other key issues.
Meanwhile, Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei on Monday reaffirmed his government’s ties with Taipei, and associated those ties with being a US ally. As US-China tensions continue to grow over the Chinese buildup in the South China Sea, exchanges with Taiwan and an ongoing trade dispute, countries worldwide increasingly find themselves on one side or the other. Those espousing democracy and shared values with the US likely support Taipei even at risk of angering Beijing. This is the trend in Europe, where countries such as the Czech Republic and Lithuania are increasingly taking bold steps to boost ties with Taipei and dismissing threats from China.
US officials have praised moves such as Lithuania’s opening of a representative office in Taipei. Conversely, when Honiara cut ties with Taipei in 2019, then-US vice president Mike Pence criticized Sogavare and canceled a trip to meet the prime minister.
The government need not worry about losing diplomatic allies or responding to baseless allegations from former allies, because leaders who care about democracy and human rights will want to have exchanges with Taiwan, while those inclined toward corruption and autocracy will crawl toward China, regardless of what Taiwan does for them.
Unfortunately for the citizens of countries favoring Beijing, their leadership will likely be bolstered while the public will face environmental degradation, inadequate infrastructure, rising public debt and an erosion of free speech and other liberties.
The government should continue to focus on its friendships with democracies, and should say goodbye to those inclined toward alliances with Beijing. It should also continue to press fellow democracies — especially the US — to establish formal ties.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS