Over the past week, a number of politicians have visited China for various reasons -- all seemingly selfless, noble and justified. In reality, these people are all seeking to advance the interests of a small segment of the people, themselves being a part of this segment.
They have volunteered to be loyal servants of the Chinese government. Their conduct will necessarily damage the collective interests of Taiwanese society and the nation. President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) said on Thursday that he hoped these people would not become tools of unificationist propaganda. We believe that in addition to moral persuasion, if any illegal activities are involved in their visits to China, they should be severely punished. The public must also condemn and criticize the behavior of these people.
This flaring up of "China fever" referred to by Chen include not only the agricultural delegation made up of several lawmakers, but also a New Party delegation and about a hundred members of local level governments who attended a forum on local governance.
This is not to mention the delegation headed by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Vice Chairman Chiang Ping-kun (江柄坤) which attended a cross-strait forum on the telecommunication industry, and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmaker Gao Jyh-peng (高志鵬) and People First Party (PFP) lawmaker Liu Yi-ju (劉憶如) who are planning on attending three financial and economic forums in China.
This is not a new wave of "China fever," but the continuation of a wave started after the KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) returned from their trips to China earlier this year. While Lien and Soong have justified their trips as a way to break the cross-strait impasse and as a means to foster peace, they have actually deepened Taiwan's domestic divisions and opened the door to visits by Chinese leaders.
KMT spokesman Chang Jung-kung (張榮恭) conceded that "the KMT actively seeks to be friendly with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in order to win back power in the presidential election in 2008." With greedy and selfish parties such as these within Taiwan, how can the Chinese government, bent on taking the nation at all costs, not make good use of them?
Despite the fact that China's oppression of Taiwan in the international community continues -- and it has been uncooperative about official cross-strait negotiations over cargo flight links and agricultural exports -- it has begun its unificationist propaganda campaign by using Taiwan's opposition parties. Generally speaking, the Chinese goal to engulf Taiwan remains unchanged. As for isolating the Taiwanese government, warming up to opposition parties and business interests, and dividing the pan-green and pan-blue camps, these are common tactics to bring about unification.
Facing Chinese unification campaigns, some politicians, such as Lien and Chiang, willingly tango with the Chinese government. Then there are those who embrace Chinese nationalism above universally-accepted democratic values, such as the New Party. Then there are those who either intentionally or unintentionally ignore the differences on either side of the Taiwan Strait and actively participate in cross-strait exchanges. In the end, they all fall prey to the unificationist campaign.
Take for example the Taiwanese participants of the forum on local government from the two sides of Taiwan Strait. They are all elected representatives of the people of Taiwan. Their job is to represent their constituents and monitor the government, not make friends with communists or phony lawmakers. Actually, those participating in the forum with these Taiwanese lawmakers are either CCP members or people appointed by the CCP. As President Chen noted, what is the point of "getting in touch" or "coming to an understanding" with these people?
These people do not represent the popular will of the Chinese people. They wine and dine with the Taiwanese because it is their job to do so. There are also some politicians and businesspeople who say that their contacts in China are not political in nature and have nothing to do with sovereignty issues. These people often call for the separation of political and business issues in dealing with China. They do these things as a way to justify their cooperation with Chinese and their unificationist propaganda.
China's unificationist tactics, while primarily based on military intimidation, also employ subtle political maneuvers. Take the telecommunications forum attended by Chiang as an example. The two sides have reached a consensus on 3G standards. This was accomplished as a result of an instruction issued by Beijing that constructive results must be attained from the forum. Because Beijing obviously used the forum as part of its unificationist campaign, questions from the US have been raised.
In light of the level of military and technological exchanges between Taiwan and US, the cross-strait agreement on 3G standards will necessarily trigger resentment and reaction from the US government. However, while the US is already anxious about China's military expansion, and while Japan and the US have listed Taiwan as a "common strategic objective," the pan-blue camp doesn't seem to care about international developments. Instead, it continues to boycott the arms procurement budget.
Politicians who are especially enthusiastic about visiting China have not only deceive themselves by giving non-political justifications for their visits, they also fail to stand up for Taiwan in an effort scuttle the sovereignty of the nation. Due to their compliant and meek attitude toward China, they view Chinese oppression of Taiwan as a necessary step. Then they come back to Taiwan and criticize the government for been "excessively political," and for willingly isolating itself.
The "China fever" has infected the blue camp to such an extent that they have become blind to the Chinese missiles targeting Taiwan. That blue camp politicians would try their reconcile their differences with the governing camp is inconceivable. Instead, they choose to reconcile with the enemy and to escalate internal divisions.
Politicians act in such a manner obviously because somebody is backing them up at home. Media independence from politics here simply does not exist. Public opinions in favor of China and against the US have been shaped deliberately. Not only are the hidden crises of Chinese economy deliberately concealed by some media outlets, but talk about China's "peaceful rise" and the "peaceful fall" of the US have began to surface.
The Japanese media have raised the possibility of a surprise attack on Taiwan by China followed by the establishment of a pro-China regime here. In view of the recent "China fever," pro-China political parties and media are already in place. When politicians can't be trusted to do what is best for the nation, it is up to the people of Taiwan to see China for what it is and prevent unification from materializing.
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