Print

Mail

wiki links

Lien and Soong make fine lapdogs

After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan's (連戰) capitulation to China, People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜), was quick to follow suit.

Their sycophancy has opened the eyes of the Taiwanese people to the ugliness of Lien and Soong's characters, but also to the feudal style of China's government in acquiring vassals. None of this is compatible with modern democracy.

Now that Lien and Soong have returned, it is time to assess the results of their betrayal of Taiwan's interests. First and foremost, as chairmen of opposition parties, their ability to sell out Taiwan's sovereignty is limited.

China might seem to have won some slight advantage at the level of political rhetoric, using Lien and Soong as part of their "united front" strategy to give credibility to the "one China" fantasy. But even if Lien and Soong proclaim China's greatness like loyal retainers, they cannot frighten Taiwan.

The cross-strait question has two aspects.

The first is the political aspect, which at its heart is about sovereignty.

The second is the actual situation and what can be done about it.

On the political front, Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) is clearly maintaining a hardline position, and he has insisted on a "one China" principle as spelled out in the so-called "1992 consensus." Lien or Soong were unable to get him to concede even an inch on this.

Lien knew what he was in for, and tossed the whole idea of the Republic of China into the Taiwan Strait before he even arrived. Soong wanted to be tough, but in the end -- under pressure from various fronts -- he also swallowed his words.

Hu was tough, and Lien and Soong came out looking weak. But then, those who capitulate cannot dictate terms, and must simply wait on those to whom they have capitulated.

When Hu insisted that the basis of the cross-strait issue would be based on the "1992 consensus," neither Lien nor Soong dared to say anything. Lien's "news release" spoke of the "1992 consensus" and Soong's statement mentioned the "two sides of the strait, one China" idea, but these are just footnotes to Hu's statement.

As the issue of sovereignty has already been decided by Hu, any point in Lien's five-point communique or Soong's six-point agreement, which disagrees with Hu's statement, will necessarily be overruled.

As for the practical aspects of the situation, only the Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) administration, which is invested with public power, can achieve anything.

Hu is clearly delighted that Lien and Soong have tried to sell out Taiwan. But apart from selling themselves, what else can Lien and Soong do?

Chin Heng-wei is editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.

Translated by Ian Bartholomew
This story has been viewed 2351 times.