From the idea of exchanging pearl milk tea for weapons, to the anti-arms-purchase rally, to debates over "striking Shanghai with missiles," to the recent attention over whether President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) will debate in congress, the controversy surrounding the arms purchase is snowballing. But is the truth being unearthed through such debates?
By using comics to promote the theme "love Taiwan, protect our home," the Ministry of National Defense had originally hoped that easy-to-understand slogans such as "one cup of pearl milk tea in exchange for national security" would win people's hearts. The idea was intended to simplify a complicated matter. Little did they know that just the opposite would be accomplished.
Perhaps those who oppose the arms purchase felt the ministry had insulted them by underestimating their intelligence. The ministry's mistake is understandable, as it represented the thinking of the military's bureaucracy. Political issues are beyond the grasp of soldiers to begin with. A campaign launched to convince the public about the need for arms purchases from such one-track minds can't encompass the political complications entailed.
What are the political complications? Premier Yu Shyi-kun said he suspected that the 11 Academia Sinica fellows who signed a petition opposing the arms purchase "[had] problems in terms of ideologies and national identity." His statement was strongly criticized. If Yu's statement could be slightly modified, as follows, his intended message may be more accurately conveyed: Yu suspects that "they differ from the ruling party, in terms of ideology and national identification."
Actually, in the petition, the fellows pointed out that Taiwan is facing "a social crisis in the `sense of community.'" The fellows and Yu obviously lacked a sense of shared community, leading him to doubt their views.
Discrepancies in feelings about national identity come from different levels of society. For example, the cross-strait peace promotion alliance organized by private social groups oppose the arms purchase from an anti-war standpoint, believing erroneously that an arms race could trigger war and that the cross-strait issue requires a political resolution. Obviously, on cross-strait issues, these groups don't have any sense of identification with the ruling party.
Of course, neither the defense ministry nor soldiers should interfere with the making of fundamental cross-strait policy. However, it is worth noting that many retired generals and military officers also signed the petition.
From the military's standpoint, current and retired personnel should support the arms purchase. The bigger the budget the military can get, the better. Under the circumstances, it is only natural that all military personnel should support the purchase.
But why don't the retired officers and generals support it? Did they have a drastic change of heart upon retirement and become supporters of peace, giving up long-held thinking on national security strategies? Surely, no one is going to believe that is the case.
It is because they differ from Yu in their sense of national identification. In the minds of these people, who are predominantly Mainlander and who embrace the Greater China ideology, the Demo-cratic Progressive Party (DPP) government is purchasing arms to push for Taiwan independence. This is of course at odds with their beliefs and sentiments.
So it is that Yu says these old generals "have problems" in terms of their ideologies and national identification, and vice versa.
If we continue to shy away from examining the issues of ideology, identification and values underlying the arms purchase, no rational discussion can be had on the matter, let alone expecting two politicians -- Chen and Soong -- to reach any conclusion through a debate.
Just as with the "319 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee," while the opposition and ruling camps righteously debate legal and constitutional principles, the more fundamental problem of discrepancies in identification are creating a sense of mistrust between the two sides, causing each to question the other's character and motives.
It does not take much to say there's a "social crisis in the `sense of community,'" but how many people are truly willing to sincerely face the reasons behind the crisis? A resolution on ethnic diversity and national unity was unanimously passed within the DPP. The opposition did not oppose this. But will the two sides really refrain from provoking each other?
What the arms purchase issue boils down to is differences in identification. Rational communication is badly needed, as the two sides lack common values and a sense of trust on the issue. The only option left is to resort to a power struggle to determine the outcome in a cruel and realistic manner.
Ku Er-teh is a freelance writer.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.