chinadaily.com.cn
China Condemns Taiwan's Obstruction of Mainland Group Tours
China criticized Taiwan's obstruction of mainland group tours to the island, citing the Taiwan Affairs Office's spokeswoman Zhu Fenglian, who stated that Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council insisted on coordination through cross-Strait tourism associations, delaying the resumption of tours announced on January 17, 2025 from Fujian and Shanghai.
- What are the potential long-term implications of the current dispute for cross-strait relations and the Taiwanese economy?
- The ongoing dispute over mainland group tours to Taiwan highlights the deeper political tensions across the Taiwan Strait. The DPP's actions are interpreted by China as deliberately harming the Taiwanese tourism industry and public interests to further its political agenda. This could lead to further deterioration in cross-strait relations and negatively impact Taiwan's economy.
- How has the history of cross-strait tourism relations contributed to the current impasse regarding the resumption of mainland group tours to Taiwan?
- China accuses Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration of consistently obstructing mainland tourism since early 2020, citing the unilateral ban on mainland visitors and restrictions on Taiwanese group tours to the mainland. The DPP's insistence on coordination through cross-Strait associations is viewed by China as a pretext for hindering the resumption of mainland group tours, despite a previous agreement in November 2024 that was later cancelled by Taiwan's association.
- What are the immediate consequences of Taiwan's refusal to allow mainland Chinese group tours to proceed without prior coordination through cross-Strait tourism associations?
- On January 17, 2025, mainland China resumed group tours to Taiwan from Fujian and Shanghai. However, Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council delayed the process by demanding coordination through cross-Strait tourism associations, a move criticized by China as obstructive. This has negatively impacted the enthusiasm of Taiwan's tourism industry.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The headline (if any) and introductory sentences likely emphasize the mainland's criticism of Taiwan's actions, setting a critical tone from the start. The article structures the narrative chronologically, detailing the mainland's actions first, followed by Taiwan's response, presenting the mainland's actions as proactive and Taiwan's as reactive and obstructive. The repeated use of phrases like "obstructing actions" and "pour cold water" further reinforces this framing.
Language Bias
The language used is strongly biased towards the mainland's perspective. Phrases like "obstructing actions," "passive response," and "pour cold water" are loaded terms expressing negativity towards the Taiwan authorities. Neutral alternatives could include "delayed response," "procedural disagreements," or "expressed concerns." The repeated use of "DPP administration" implies a negative association with the ruling party, which colors the narrative.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the Chinese mainland's perspective and the actions of the Taiwan authorities. It omits perspectives from Taiwanese citizens, travel agencies, or tourism industry representatives beyond the official statements. The potential economic impact on Taiwan's tourism sector from both sides' perspectives is not explored. While acknowledging space constraints is relevant, the lack of diverse voices limits a balanced understanding of the situation.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the situation as the mainland being cooperative and Taiwan being obstructive. It simplifies the complex political relationship between mainland China and Taiwan, neglecting the historical context and political motivations behind Taiwan's decisions. The narrative does not allow for the possibility of legitimate concerns on the Taiwanese side beyond the claim of procedural issues.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights political obstructions by Taiwan authorities hindering cross-strait tourism, impacting peace and stability between the two sides. The actions of the DPP administration, as described, create obstacles to cooperation and mutual understanding, undermining efforts towards peaceful resolution of differences.