This interminable blather about party-to-party cooperation continues until we are sick of hearing about it. We no longer want to hear anything about it unless something that actually bears scrutiny as a party-to-party deal has been done. But it won't, at least not in the next few months. And yet the endless talking about it, like some Guantanamo-style psychological torture method, is beginning to cause those of us with functioning intelligences acute mental pain.
First we saw the government and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) flirting with the People First Party (PFP). This was, of course, absurd and everyone knew it to be so, and yet we were told in great earnestness that a deal was just around the corner as soon as PFP Chairman James Soong (
The idea that these two parties could ever find common ground is simply ridiculous. The purpose of the DPP is to retain Taiwan's de facto independent status, and strengthen the identification of the polity with Taiwan, thereby undoing the false consciousness among Taiwanese created by 50 years of the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) colonial rule.
The purpose of the PFP is to engineer the return of Taiwan to China. Its Mainlander supporters would rather be ruled by China than by native Taiwanese -- which is what majority rule in Taiwan really means. There is no overlap of interests between these two parties. Their world views are irreconcilable and the idea of their cooperating, if it was ever earnestly meant, would involve such a cynical abandonment of core values as to make one seriously question the political process it was meant to serve.
It should be obvious that if there is to be any cooperation at all it has to be between parties that are committed to making Taiwan work, not handing it over to a foreign power. There is only one blue-camp contender that fits this description and that is the KMT. But not, unfortunately, all of the KMT. The party is radically split between various Taiwanese and Mainlander factions. To put it simply, most Taiwanese in the KMT want pretty much what the DPP wants -- consolidation of Taiwanese power.
The Mainlanders, on the other hand, don't really know what they want. The more idealistic among them -- the Ma Ying-jeous (
It should be obvious that the pan greens and the Taiwanese KMT have interests in common and could cooperate. But this is impossible while KMT Chairman Lien Chan (
The best thing for Taiwan would be for Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS