Tougher Taiwan stance in South China Sea justified
Play
Taiwan President Ma Ying-jeou set off for Taiping Island on Thursday, a symbolic move aimed at advancing Taiwan’s territorial claims within the South China Sea.
Taiping, also know as Itu Aba, lies in an area where Taiwan shares overlapping claims with China, Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines. Brunei also claims a part of the South China Sea.
Ma’s recent move runs counter to criticisms of his being weak on foreign policy. In so doing, Ma’s government is defying its key ally, the US.
Previously, the US Department of State spokesman Mark Toner said that although Ma had every right to make his position clear on the South China Sea, the US is disappointed by the action, saying it could exacerbate tensions in an area already fraught with tension.
Whether the Republic of China wishes to claim sovereignty in the region as the legitimate claimant it is, is an indisputable right not to be interfered with by other countries, as well as an action that should be unapologetically supported by the Taiwanese public.
Not only is the trip justified, it is the best strategic option in the face of heightening threats from other claimants.
Tensions have risen in the past two years, as Beijing embarks on a massive land reclamation programme. The US said that mainland China had reclaimed 2,000 acres of land – equivalent to 1,500 football fields – in massive dredging operations, building man-made islands with airfields, ports and lighthouses.
Also, Ma’s government is pressed to toughen its stance as the islet risks being degraded to the legal status of a “rock” in claims the Philippines previously made to the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague.
If recognised as such, rather than as an “island” that could sustain human habitation and economic life of its own, Taiping would not be entitled to its rights to 200 nautical miles and to an exclusive economic zone, according to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
News of the Taiping visit comes barely a week after Tsai Ing-wen and her Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) achieved a landslide victory in the election. However, Tsai had turned down an invitation for her to send an envoy on the trip.
It is not hard to notice the stark difference between the DPP’s reaction to this trip by Ma to Taiping Island, and that of former president Chen Shui-bian in 2008 when he attended the grand opening of the Taiping Island Airport – the DPP unanimously voiced congratulations and support on that previous trip.
If the DPP seeks to advance Taiwan’s sovereignty, aligning to the image the party has long projected, why aren’t its party members proudly showing support for Ma’s trip? This strange phenomenon comes as a result of interplay between great power diplomacy and domestic politics.
Tsai’s reaction – or rather choosing not to react at all – is a decision made in the fear that it would be seen as a provocation to the US, and the future government may need to rely on warmer ties with the US, if relations with China cool off.
Tsai refused to send any representatives at all. This leaves some questions regarding her position on South China Sea claims, and might even undermine her prior declaration of a commitment to “maintain the status quo”.
Some would argue that Ma going to Taiping near the end of his eight years in office makes the timing less sensitive, compared to Tsai. There are also speculations that this trip is partially motivated by his personal interests – a move that can be viewed as part of his legacy in “advancing Taiwan’s maritime interests.”
Nonetheless, Tsai will eventually need to offer a clear stance on Taiping. A collective, silent response from the DPP is worrying, as matters of sovereignty should be held beyond inter-party politics.
In the second Hunger Games book and film “Catching Fire”, characters repeatedly tell the heroine to “Remember who the real enemy is.” This reminder helped her keep perspective in the brutal survival game, where players are forced into playing by an oppressive government.
Whoever the adversaries might be for Taiwan in the South China Sea disputes, parties need to rise above inter-party grudges and loyalty considerations, and not hold back on voicing support for an action that should by welcomed.
In the international arena, the inability of Taiwan’s political leaders to unite in protecting the nation’s sovereignty might come at the expense of its people.
