Two major political incidents have occurred recently. One was the visit to China by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Vice Chairman Chiang Pin-kun (江丙坤) and the 10-point agreement that he reached with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The second was Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) Chairman Shu Chin-chiang's (蘇進強) sudden visit to pay his respects to the souls of the Taiwanese who are memorialized at the Yasukuni Shrine in Japan. These two incidents both involve the question of whether Taiwan's young democracy will be deepened and consolidated on the foundation of a diverse society.
If there is one set of values that every group in Taiwan agrees upon and cherishes, it is freedom, democracy and human rights. Although it is true that diversity and the right to individual expression should be given constitutional protection in a democratic republic, a democratic society must also give equal respect to differing values held by minority groups.
A diverse society lacking mutual understanding and respect will never be able to build a strong democracy. Instead, it will develop into a fragmentary political situation where everyone is fighting everyone else for power.
Given what I have seen in connection to these two incidents, this is also my concern.
The KMT may think it unlikely that the Democratic Progressive Party government -- following the Lunar New Year cross-strait flights and President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong's (宋楚瑜) 10-point agreement -- will do much this year to promote the 10-point agreement between the KMT and the CCP -- although many of these points are items that the government has said before that it wanted to pursue.
It may believe that Chiang's visit was worth it because it is beneficial to the Taiwanese public at large, even though it will help Beijing extract itself from the difficult situation it put itself in with the "Anti-Secession" Law. The KMT's actions will, however, mean that there is a price to be paid for Taiwan's democracy.
The KMT has always believed in democracy, freedom and equal distribution of wealth, and it passed the National Unification Guidelines demanding that China accept the expression of public opinion and implement democracy and the rule of law. So why didn't it -- during Chiang's visit -- utter a single word of criticism or doubt concerning the CCP Even though the CPP threw professor Jiao Guobiao (焦國標) out of Peking University for criticizing the CCP's Publicity Department, it wants diplomatic recognition from the Vatican despite its suppression of religious freedom, and it didn't let the Chinese mourn the death of former premier Zhao Ziyang (趙紫陽).
The KMT also failed to use the trip as a chance to take a stand against the CCP for applying political pressure on Taiwanese businesspeople in China to take a position on the Anti-Secession Law. Even if the KMT has given up the idea of helping China democratize, should the party also give up the ideal of protecting the Taiwanese people's freedom of expression? Shouldn't they try not to lose their faculty of speech when facing the CCP?
Regardless of whether KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) will visit China, the party should stop trying to unbalance to the scale of diversity that Taiwan cherishes so much -- economy and freedom. If that balance is lost, the KMT will not only harm itself, but society as a whole.
Following the same logic, the TSU's visit to the Yasukuni Shrine also imposes a high cost on the nation's democracy. Regardless of their interpretation of history, the indifference of TSU leaders to the diversity of values and memories in Taiwanese society is astonishing. I believe that Mainlanders and indigenous peoples, as well as some Minnan and Hakka still harbor unhappy memories and feelings, if not deep hatred, toward Japan for its rule over Taiwan.
A nation's diplomacy must of course be built on reason, and there must also exist multiple interpretations of the changes in the international arena. If, however, the TSU takes the kind of action that it knows will hurt certain groups simply to balance out actions by another group that has hurt its feelings, then this is not only politically shortsighted, but also extremely irresponsible.
For Taiwanese society, the TSU's idealistic pursuit of an independent and sovereign Taiwan can be understood, if not agreed with. But a visit to the Yasukuni Shrine hurts the fundamental trust in a diversity of values among different ethnic groups. The price that must be paid by the nation's democracy is too high.
History has left Taiwanese society with too many deep wounds. These must be healed with love, tolerance and mutual understanding. We all cherish democracy, freedom and human rights. These are also our only weapons when facing international powers. But these values must be nurtured and protected to grow strong. In the name of democracy and a common future, look into the future and stop hurting each other.
Hsu Szu-chien is an assistant research fellow at the Institute of Political Science at Academia Sinica.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with