|
|
|
Singapore
do itself on July 18, 2004 Singapore
to play a cross-strait role By
the Liberty Times editorial Besides paying a visit to President Chen Shui-bian at the Presidential
Office, he also attended a dinner banquet hosted by the president at the
Presidential Residence and visited other government officials as well as
American Institute in Taiwan director Douglas Paal. Lee left Taipei last Tuesday and returned to Singapore. His visit to Taiwan
received much media attention here. Chen and Lee reportedly had a very pleasant
meeting, during which the two discussed a host of issues related to relationship
between Taiwan and Singapore, including enhancement of bilateral cooperation,
trade, the future development of Southeast Asia and peace and stability in the
cross-strait relationship. While Lee's visit was unofficial, and thus, the contents of his discussions
with Chen were not revealed, a visit from the future leader of Singapore was
enough to highlight the solidarity between Taiwan and Singapore.
Despite strong protest by Beijing, Lee was determined to come to Taiwan,
which makes the visit that much more significant. Lee came to this country and met its leaders out of consideration for
Singapore's national interests and other issues concerning his power succession.
To Lee, cross-strait tension and polarization may not only endanger peace
and stability in Asia, it will also impact the national security of Singapore.
Lee came to Taiwan right after his visit to Bei-jing two months ago. Regardless
of whether he was here as a messenger of Beijing, the visit shows how much
Singapore cares about the cross-strait situation. Many people describe the
future leader of Singapore's visit to Beijing, then to Taipei, as a "trip
of enlightenment." Lee will necessarily have to seek an appropriate strategic role in the
ever-changing and unpredictable international power structure and the
increasingly tense cross-strait situation. This will enhance Singapore's position in Asia. Lee's trip to either side
of the Taiwan Strait was an attempt to understand the views of its leaders in
preparation to succeed his father, Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew. It remains to be seen whether Lee came to Taiwan in the role of
cross-strait arbitrator or merely a messenger of Beijing. If he does act as an
arbitrator, he will be following the path of his father, who traveled back and
forth between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, establishing friendships with
leaders on both sides, finally ushering in the 1993 meeting in Singapore between
officials from the the Straits Exchange Foundation and the PRC's Association for
Relations Across the Taiwan Strait. But Lee will have to leverage his diplomacy and play an active role in
establishing security and peace -- not to mention maximizing the interests of
Singapore. The main purpose of Lee's trip to Beijing and his recent visit to Taipei
was to understand his friends and foes in order to maintain Singapore as an
active player in Asia. His diplomatic visits thus far have shown his wisdom. By
understanding the cross-strait situation, Lee can offer assistance in bargaining
while at the same safeguard the interests of Singapore without being drawn too
far into cross-strait issues. Chen would do well to learn from such wisdom, as
Taiwan is also a small country in the Asia-Pacific region. Lee's grasp of the positions of Beijing and Taipei should help him maneuver
in the international arena. However, it must also be pointed out that as the
situation in the Taiwan Strait deteriorates, this country is not to be blamed.
Rather, China will be pointed out as the antagonistic one. Beijing's
stubbornness is where the instability lies. Lee should not completely embrace
his father's diplomatic path of focusing more on a relationship with China over
Taiwan. After all, the cross-strait relationship is no longer what it used to
be. If Lee understands how much both the ruling and opposition camps here hope
for cross-strait peace and can convey that message to Beijing, perhaps much of
the tension in cross-strait relations can be eased. This should be a central feature of Lee's diplomatic policy. However, if he
continues his father's way of giving priority to a relationship with China over
Taiwan, then it will be difficult for him to help resolve the current impasse in
the Taiwan Strait. Credit must be given to Lee's trip to Taiwan despite repeated protests from
China. He also must be commended for raising the possibility of signing of a
free-trade agreement with Taiwan. In addition to preparing Lee for his power succession, his trip
demonstrated the deep friendship between Singapore and Taiwan. While there is no formal diplomatic relationship between the two nations,
continued dialogue and diplomatic exchanges will make relations stronger. From another perspective, Lee's trip to Taiwan is also the result of the
governing Democratic Progressive Party's undying efforts to expand foreign
relationships and increase the nation's position in the international community.
Taiwan is gradually moving its focus away from the West to the South
Pacific with regard to trade and economic exchanges. Lee may have indeed paved
the way for Taiwan to "head south" in a more ambitious fashion, which
would benefit the nation's economic relations with not only Singapore, but also
the entire region. At the very least, this relationship will decrease Taiwan's excessive
economic dependence on China. `One
China' means slavery By
Daniel McCarthy The opinion piece by Zhang Jia-lin ("What does `one China' truly
mean?" July 12, page 8) contained the same old arrogant and condescend-ing
tone that has been coming out of Beijing for decades. Zhang's writing also contains logical contradictions, such as the idea that
Taiwan is not a province of the China and there are in fact "two
Chinas," but Taiwan is part of China. Only the twisted logic of a fundamental religious zealot could reach such a
conclusion, but then again, "one China" appears to be a religious
belief with many followers eager to prove their zealotry. It is interesting that the core value of the "one China" ideology
is a desire to dominate and oppress the people of Taiwan, rather than showing
love and kindness based on a relationship of kinship. It is no wonder then that although the Taiwanese people love peace and
prosperity, they would risk war and destruction to avoid being governed by the
likes of Zhang and his ilk. Daniel
McCarthy United States Status
quo outdated By
James Chou The US' own antiquated
notion of the "status quo" that governs the present relationship
between Taiwan and is rapidly changing and being challenged. The US can no longer rely on its own agenda to deal with the geopolitical
reality in the region today, given that the region is undergoing tremendous
transformation politically, culturally and economically. Three decades ago, the US could easily deal with a Taiwan ruled by the
autocratic regime of Chiang Kai-shek and later Chiang Ching-kuo. The US must now, albeit in an indirect fashion, deal with the 23 million
Taiwanese people and their democratically elected leaders, as politics is no
longer being dominated by just one or two dictators and their closely connected
inner circle. The US' demand that the Taiwanese people not challenge the US-defined
"status quo" is not only impractical, it is immoral. Simply put, whether the status quo will provide long-term peace and
stability in the Taiwan Strait is increasingly questionable. Instead of pressuring Taiwanese to live with the unrealistic "one
China" policy or the US-defined "status quo" indefinitely,
Washington must come up with new initiatives to challenge its own "status
quo" if stability and peace of the region is still a vital part of its
interests. Such re-examination of the outdated China-Taiwan policy, made to reflect
today's political reality, is a must -- especially when all the stakeholders
realize that the likelihood of a peaceful resolution in the Taiwan Strait is
increasingly dim. James
Chou Vancouver, Canada
|
|
|
