Yesterday in this space, we elucidated the lies currently being bandied about by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) as reasons for yet again opposing the purchase of the weapons deemed essential to protect Taiwan from China. We finished by pointing out that the truth of the matter is that the legislature is currently in the power of agents acting exclusively on behalf of Taiwan's enemy. Al-Qaeda controlling the US Congress would be one parallel.
What are patriotic Taiwanese to do while the pan-blues go off to China to sell out their country? First, let's admit this isn't a question typical of a constitutional democracy. Few countries ever find themselves with a large political faction which, in return for a guarantee of perpetual power, wants to hand the nation over to its enemies. The Irish Act of Union in 1801 and the Anschluss and Sudeten Crisis in 1938 are the only even remotely similar examples that come to mind.
Taiwan's position is, in fact, a nightmare whereby expert, well-financed political operators use the freedoms granted to them by a democratic system, and the tolerance given to them by the population, to destroy that system and sell those people into slavery.
The idea of democracy's misuse is as old as the Weimar Republic. And post-Sept. 11, freedom can be exploited for evil purposes, and any polity has to find what it deems a suitable balance between liberty and security. What makes Taiwan's condition unusual, however, is that the lack of a clear Taiwanese identity means that handing the country over to its enemy is unusually easy, in that there is little patriotic spirit among the Taiwanese with which to oppose such a devil's bargain.
This is a result of Taiwan's miserable history of colonization, first by the Japanese and then by the alien KMT regime. The relationship of the Taiwanese to power has always been one of weakness; there has always been some massive external authority against which it is deemed futile to struggle.
This has resulted in a mindset whereby success depends on deft maneuvering within an alien-imposed system, rather than a head-on defiance of that system. Such a viewpoint promotes petty self-interest at the expense of the interests of the people as a whole. A perfect example of such thinking can be seen in the uproar over fruit exports to China, where a few hundred farmers are prepared to trash the authority of the central government in return for being able to send some boatloads of mangoes across the Taiwan Strait.
The pan-blues are set on putting Taiwan under another colonial master, China, with themselves as the master's agents. To prevent this, the Taiwanese first have to evolve a real patriotism, a sense of Taiwan as something worth saving, something worth protecting and fighting for. What is needed is a mass organization, independent of any political party, which can educate and mobilize people with the pledge to protect Taiwan from its enemies, both without and within.
The germ of such an organization was in the 228 Hand-in-Hand Rally last year, and the march against China's "Anti-Secession" Law this spring. It's been shown that people can be roused, but so far it has been for a message of peace. Instead, they should be mobilized to send a message of angry defiance -- either you are for a free Taiwan or you do not deserve to live here. They should then begin to suit actions to these tough words.
We know who the traitors are. Why should they continue to enjoy impunity? "The wrath of the Taiwanese" -- it's a phrase that now can only be used tongue-in-cheek. It must become something that pan-blues fear.
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