On Aug. 25 Ding Zilin (
The letter opens by thanking Ma for his long-term support over the Tiananmen Square massacre, before changing its tone and moving on to the issue of the KMT's policy regarding China. She says, "In all honesty, for many years now, I have become disillusioned with the KMT, not only because of their defeat in the 2000 presidential elections, but more because of their vacillating cross-strait policy. Former KMT chairman Lien Chan's (
I have known Ding for many years now, and know her to be a gentle and refined person. Therefore, it came as quite a surprise to me when, referring to Lien's trip to China, she resorted to language such as "more than one could take," and "ridiculous." It is quite apparent just how rattled Ding was by the incident.
She offers the following suggestion to the KMT: "A politician, and in fact even a political party, can lose everything except for one thing: It cannot lose the courage to stand up to a stronger power."
Surely, the KMT would do well to take this advice to heart.
On accepting the position of KMT chairman, Ma took on a serious challenge: whether or not to continue on the "Lien Chan route." To this, Ding says, "as far as I can see, there is nothing complicated about cross-strait relations. When it comes down to it, it is a conflict between two systems. If talks are to be held, then everything should be laid out on the negotiating table, not just the three links, and not just fruit and pandas. They need to discuss human rights, they need to discuss political reform and they need to discuss freedom of the press. They certainly cannot limit the negotiations merely to issues that Beijing wants to talk about. On the contrary, the less Beijing wants to discuss a certain issue, the more important it is to broach it, as these issues tend to concern the welfare of the people."
This is no longer a mere suggestion: It is a heart-felt hope, it is sincere advice. However, one does wonder whether the KMT will actually listen.
For a long time now there has been a major blind spot in the way Taiwan has approached the cross-strait issue. It has paid exclusive attention to what the Chinese Communist Party is doing, while entirely ignoring what the Chinese people think about the issue. This shows a lack of understanding of China. In fact, as Ding has pointed out, "a more humane system is sure to take root in China eventually."
The Chinese communists may well represent today's China, but they certainly don't represent tomorrow's. Any Taiwanese politician with foresight should seek out, and listen to, the voice of the Chinese people, which even now is getting louder.
Wang Dan is a member of the Chinese democracy movement, a visiting scholar at Harvard University and a member of the Taipei Society.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
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