The Taipei City Council on Monday decided to freeze the NT$1.3 million (US$46,716) budget for the annual forum between Taipei and Shanghai if Chinese military aircraft and ships continue to patrol near Taiwan. The city council should be commended for defying Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), as the forum should not be held.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) does not allow politicians to hold events that are not in line with party objectives, and the forum is no exception. It is intended to push China’s unification agenda — which most Taiwanese oppose — and the use of public funds for Ko to attend such an event is inappropriate. Arguably, he should not be allowed to visit China — an antagonistic enemy state — at all.
That Taipei City Councilor Pan Hwai-tzong (潘懷宗), convener of the pro-China New Party, agreed that the forum should not be held amid poor cross-strait relations shows how much aversion toward the CCP exists in Taiwan. Ko, as chairman of the Taiwan People’s Party, a prominent third-force political party, should not entertain the idea of interacting with CCP officials amid such hostilities.
Ill intentions might not motivate Ko to attend the forum, but he is overly idealistic about what the event can achieve for Taiwan. He has said on numerous occasions that the “two sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family.” It is unclear what Ko means — whether he is implying that there are many Taiwanese with relatives in China or that Taiwanese and Chinese share cultural values — but the remarks have been problematic for the mayor.
Asked by reporters in 2019 to explain the statements, Ko said that “it is an expression of attitude, meaning ‘we will be friendly to your people, but we want you to be friendly to Taiwanese in return.’”
How that is different from what Taiwan would expect from relations with any country is unclear.
Last month, Ko said that the goal of the forum is to jointly build the “Chinese dream,” as “the two sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to one family” and “people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait are Chinese of the same race and speak the same language,” a Central News Agency report said.
Perhaps Ko should consider what Hong Kongers think of the “Chinese dream.” Does he believe Singapore should discuss unification with China, since both countries “speak the same language” and have majority populations “of the same race”? What of Canada, the UK and the US? No such combination of countries considers unification, despite sharing a common history, culture and values. What would Taiwan’s indigenous peoples have to say about the “Chinese dream”?
Ironically, Ko in January 2020 criticized China for terminating Shanghai’s sister city status with Prague, saying that China should not attempt to decide what friendly relationships Prague pursues. Ko seemingly failed to realize that Chinese pressure on Prague was designed to pressure Taiwan, to decide who Taiwan can be friends with. Is that how “family” treat each other?
China represents a legitimate threat to Taiwan, and not just militarily. In March last year, Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Kuo Kuo-wen (郭國文) raised concern after Taiwanese junior-high school students were recognized by the Pingtan County Government in China’s Fujian Province for essays they wrote about “compatriot love.” The same county last month hosted youth events in a renewed bid to influence Taiwanese.
Chinese interactions with Taiwanese are held for the clear purpose of furthering the CCP’s “united front” objectives. The sooner Ko realizes this, the better.
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS