A number of students have been taking part in a hunger strike as part of demonstrations organized by the pan-blues at the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall. The Chinese-language media in the US have since printed sensationalist stories of how Wu'er Kaixi (吾爾開希) and Shen Tong (沈彤), both prominent members of the 1989 pro-democracy protests in China which ended with the Tiananmen massacre, participated in the hunger strike. The pair said that when they visited the scene, they felt something akin to the atmosphere that day in Tiananmen Square. According to Wu'er, the media and the law in Taiwan were being controlled by the government, and he wanted to give his support to the people.
I cannot help but pity Wu'er. The Tiananmen massacre happened 15 years ago, and he is now almost 40 years old. It seems that with the passage of time he has lost the ability to differentiate between dictatorship and democracy. He seems to think Taipei is Beijing, and muddles the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) with the Chinese Communist Party. His values are utterly confused. After more than a decade living in the free world, Wu'er doesn't seem to have learned anything.
The students who gathered in Tiananmen on that day in June were protesting against a dictatorial government that had deprived more than a billion Chinese of the freedom of choice. Taiwan, on the other hand, has already had three elections in which its president was directly elected, in addition to countless democratic local and legislative elections. How is it possible to equate democratic Taiwan, in which the government is elected by the people, with China?
The students taking part in the Tiananmen protests resorted to hunger strikes because this was the only way to make themselves heard. The media and legal processes were completely controlled by the Communist Party. Taiwan, by contrast, is already well along the road toward a healthy democracy and enjoys freedom of the press. Sure, the government has its problems, but it owes its existence to democratic elections. Sure, there is room for improvement in the media and the legal system, but at least they are free and independent.
How can Wu'er justify saying that these mechanisms are being controlled by the DPP? It is common knowledge that a large part of the media is actually biased in favor of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party.
The US has also seen its share of chaotic elections, but the losers never provoked demonstrations, nor did students amass in front of government buildings and start hunger strikes. Everything was done through legal channels. In a society governed by the rule of law, people should act like citizens, not form mobs.
People like Wu'er Kaixi ought to count themselves lucky to have been able to move from a dictatorial system in China to a free Taiwan. Fifteen years later, Wu'er and others don't seem to understand the value of freedom.
It leaves me wondering: What exactly was it that they were fighting for in Tiananmen Square?
Cao Changching is a writer based in the US.
Translated by Paul Cooper
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
Media said that several pan-blue figures — among them former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), former KMT legislator Lee De-wei (李德維), former KMT Central Committee member Vincent Hsu (徐正文), New Party Chairman Wu Cheng-tien (吳成典), former New Party legislator Chou chuan (周荃) and New Party Deputy Secretary-General You Chih-pin (游智彬) — yesterday attended the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) military parade commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. China’s Xinhua news agency reported that foreign leaders were present alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, North Korean leader Kim
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) is expected to be summoned by the Taipei City Police Department after a rally in Taipei on Saturday last week resulted in injuries to eight police officers. The Ministry of the Interior on Sunday said that police had collected evidence of obstruction of public officials and coercion by an estimated 1,000 “disorderly” demonstrators. The rally — led by Huang to mark one year since a raid by Taipei prosecutors on then-TPP chairman and former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) — might have contravened the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), as the organizers had
RSS