I realized just today how quickly the dispute between Taiwan and the Philippines had fallen off the front pages of the world's newspapers. I did read this Western perspective in the
International Herald Tribune which reports the views of two Western observers. One points disapprovingly to "Han chauvinists," for whom "an apology from the president of the Philippines is not enough. The Filipinos must grovel, be reminded that they, like Malays generally, are the serfs of the region." The other commentator downplays Han chauvinism and focuses on the domestic Taiwanese political situation stressing "local legislators’ political ambitions in fishermen’s constituencies, as well as opposition parties’ efforts to criticize [President] Ma no matter what he does, especially at a time when he is vulnerable.”
To this Western observer, the key sticking point described in the article is Taiwan's demand for a formal state apology from the Philippines. This puts the Philippines, an adherent of the "one-China" policy, in a difficult diplomatic box. I did a quick search to see how other military or, as in this case, quasi-military disputes with Taiwan have been resolved so far. In January,
2006, a Taiwanese fisherman in the "Philippines Sea" was killed by men dressed in military uniforms. They were suspected of being pirates, and the Philippines' defense ministry claimed none of its units were in the area. If there were other cases in the past decade where Taiwanese fishermen were killed or injured by Philippine forces I cannot find them. I do see articles about Taiwanese fishing ships being seized by the Philippine Coast Guard, but none about their occupants being shot. I also don't see any indication that there has ever been a state-level exchange over events like these.
I must say I can understand why someone might think "Han chauvinism" could be a real political force after reading
this reply in the Comments section to the article. I'll refrain from reposting that racist piece of trash here.