Taiwan and South Korea, the two sibling states of East Asia, have long held contempt for each other even before the two broke off diplomatic relations. Despite deliberate efforts to ignore one another, they cannot help but observe each other in secret -- while learning and borrowing ideas. As a result, each brings its own influence to bear.
For example, South Korea's resumption of popular presidential elections in 1987 served as a good role model for Taiwan, prompting it to implement similar elections for the first time in 1996. In 1994, the election of Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) into the Taipei mayoral seat gave Seoul much inspiration. The following year, Seoul also elected the opposition's Cho Soon as mayor. Near the end of 1997, Kim Dae-jung was elected president, transferring power in South Korea into the hands of the opposition for the first time. That election similarly served as an impetus to the election of the DPP's Chen into the presidency in Taiwan in 2000.
The two countries definitely influence each other, but their understanding of each other is often superficial, not to mention that, after the severing of diplomatic ties between the two countries, many unresolved matters between them (such as the resumption of air links and the trade deficit issues) have been left hanging. Of course, this is because these issues were never at the top of the countries' priority lists at the same time.
As result of this indifference, the two sides often make erroneous comparisons. For example, when the two Koreas held their first summit meeting in June 2000, the pro-unification camp of Taiwan became extremely excited. They compared the example of South and North Korea with the cross-strait situation. They then went on to blame the government for the cross-strait impasse. Around the time of June's World Cup, the Taiwan media also contrasted Taiwan with South Korea -- the center of the world's attention at the time -- to satirize Taiwan.
During this presidential election in South Korea, the same thing has happened again. Both the pan-blue and pan-green have different expectations and viewpoints about the election. When it is all over, the two camps will each interpret the results of the election whichever way will best fit their needs.
How should we view the South Korean presidential elections, which will see Roh Moo-hyun of the pro-government Millennium Democratic Party battle it out with the conservative Lee Hoi-chang of the opposition Grand National Party to succeed Kim who must, by law, step down after his single five-year term? The following is a list of points that will interest Taiwanese.
First, can the successful integration within the ruling camp between Roh and Chung Mong-joon, who was the South Korean president of FIFA during the country's phenomenally successful World Cup run, inspire the successful integration of Taiwan's pan-blue camp?
The integration of political camps is necessarily dependent on the following: first, the trade-off of political or economic interests; secondly, one has something the other one needs.
The integration of Roh's and Chung's camps last month is almost a replica of the integration of the Kim Dae-jung and Kim Jong-pil camps five years ago. In other words, it is the integration of the radical and conservative camps from the opposite end of the spectrum. It would be comparable to the integration of the DPP's "New Wave" faction and the New Party. Koreans can work out this kind of partnership between the two ends of the extremes. It is unlikely that Taiwan can do the same.
After Roh's and Chung's camps integrated, their partnership was criticized as "having one party providing the man, and the other party the policies."
They are likely to be bedfellows only for a short interim period. When either feels that the other no long has any value to him, they will go their separate ways.
And while we are talking about having something that is of value to another, the founder of the Hyundai Group Chung Ju-yung donated US$500 million to North Korea to help Kim Dae-jung make the Korean summit possible, and make his dream of winning the Nobel Peace Prize a reality. When the newly elected government begins to retread old grudges, it is hard to say whether the donation will not become grounds to attack Chung Mong-joon.
On the other hand, as a result of Roh's appeal for the eradication of hatred between factions based in different geographical regions, he became the first post-war political figure in South Korea to be accepted by both the Kyongsang Provinces (Silla) and Cholla Provinces (Paekche) factions. Can such a "middle way" be of any inspiration to the ethnic rivalry in Taiwan?
The inter-region hatred between South Koreans is much worse than the ethnicity complex in Taiwan.
It has gotten to the point that people of Kyongsang Provinces and Cholla Provinces do not marry each other. As a native of Pusan, Roh is playing the role of a pioneer in resolving the regional hatred and trying to pull the two ends of spectrum together. Isn't this another type of "integration" as well?
Third, the division of South and North Korea was the doing of the world superpowers. It is different from the way the two sides of the Taiwan Strait were divided as a result of a civil war. Therefore, the current status of division and any potential unification are in no way incomparable.
South Korea is in a worse situation than Taiwan. For the past 50 years, the US has stationed troops in South Korea, provoking strong anti-US sentiment in South Korea. Heightened Korean nationalism has gotten to the point where virtually everyone in Korea resents the US. Plus, after democratization in 1988, censorship of speeches about North Korea has been eliminated entirely, allowing leftist ideology in South Korean society to increase. By now, virtually the entire country leans toward the left.
The US troops stationed in South Korea are there to protect South Korea from North Korea. But, today, the South Korean people see them as "roadblocks to unification."
Unlike South Korea, Taiwan does not have strong anti-US sentiment. Leftist unification supporters are an extremely small minority. Therefore, the situation in Taiwan is completely different, and should not be compared with that of South Korea.
Fourth, if one is forced to draw analogies, then Lee Hoi-chang would be akin to KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and Roh Moo-hyun would be akin to President Chen. But this kind of comparison just somehow seems misleading.
The similarities between Lee and Lien are that they are both in the opposition and were both defeated in past elections. The difference is that Lee is a tough conservative, while Lien is conservative but not very tough.
The comparison between Chen and Roh is even more interesting. Despite both belonging to the ruling party, the reform camp and the post-war generation, they are virtual opposites of each other. Roh is a radical leftist, while Chen is a moderate independence supporter. Roh is close to the North Korean communist regime, while Chen is anti-communist.
If Roh is elected, there will be endless friction between the US and South Korea, which is something not necessarily good for either Taiwan or East Asia.
It would not be practical for the pan-green camp of Taiwan to place their bets on Roh.
The development of Taiwan and South Korea reflects many similarities, which have often prompted the international community to make comparisons. But, the two are different in their histories, cultures, values and interests. Extreme caution is required when making any comparisons between the two. One must not make wrong analogies based on superficial similarities.
Rick Chu (
Chinese agents often target Taiwanese officials who are motivated by financial gain rather than ideology, while people who are found guilty of spying face lenient punishments in Taiwan, a researcher said on Tuesday. While the law says that foreign agents can be sentenced to death, people who are convicted of spying for Beijing often serve less than nine months in prison because Taiwan does not formally recognize China as a foreign nation, Institute for National Defense and Security Research fellow Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲) said. Many officials and military personnel sell information to China believing it to be of little value, unaware that
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
The central bank and the US Department of the Treasury on Friday issued a joint statement that both sides agreed to avoid currency manipulation and the use of exchange rates to gain a competitive advantage, and would only intervene in foreign-exchange markets to combat excess volatility and disorderly movements. The central bank also agreed to disclose its foreign-exchange intervention amounts quarterly rather than every six months, starting from next month. It emphasized that the joint statement is unrelated to tariff negotiations between Taipei and Washington, and that the US never requested the appreciation of the New Taiwan dollar during the
RSS