Although there were few surprises in President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) New Year message this year, it made it difficult for Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to pick a fight. In the end, Ma resorted to playing the economy card, but this fell flat, as it was totally irrelevant. Chen himself had said all along that this New Year's address was just as important as his speech upon winning the election, and much can be read into this.
The speech was basically a reiteration of the principle of the sovereignty of Taiwan and a restatement of the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) core values. By putting Taiwan back in the spotlight, the speech was a blow to the pan-blue camp and an antidote to the pan-green camp's blues. Chen opened the speech by alluding to the ideas of Taiwan's image, Taiwan's hopes, Taiwan's spirit and Taiwan consciousness. Having focused on the theme of national identity, he pointed out that the main driving force behind Taiwan's historical development was the 23 million people who live here. This was clearly an appeal by the president to the people of Taiwan, looking to them for backing as he tried to distinguish Taiwan from the party-state and from China.
Chen continued, saying that the KMT government of the past 60 years had been an "immigrant regime," a point that was not lost on Ma, who was sitting right there in the room. Chen also alluded to the long period of martial law that the KMT regime oversaw, and rather impertinently used the term "foreign power," from which the new KMT chairman has sought to disassociate his party. Chen went on with his theme, highlighting the significance to Taiwan's democracy of the handover of political power from the KMT to the DPP, saying that this placed sovereignty in the hands of the people and contrasting the idea of power in the hands of the people with power in the hands of an immigrant regime. This is not a path that Taiwan should tread again.
Without naming names, Chen implied that Ma was promoting the return of the "immigrant regime" under the guise of "uniting Taiwan" and "establishing a normal democratic society." The distinction between power in the hands of the people and a foreign regime is the difference between who is in control and whose word counts. Ma has said to the foreign press that he sees unification with China as the KMT's ultimate goal, and he has always viewed pro-independence activity as an unpardonable offence. In the past, Ma has been anti-communist, but now we see him in a new incarnation, "anti-communist but not anti-China." This means that he adheres to the policy of uniting with the communists against the pro-independence factions in Taiwan, which is tantamount to removing freedom of choice from the Taiwanese people. Not only does this go against the idea of putting power in the hands of the people, it shows quite clearly that Ma hasn't changed much since the days of martial law.
What this all means is that the difference between the DPP and the KMT, or between Chen and Ma, is the distinction between democracy and its absence.
With this as his foundation, the president then continued to make distinctions based on the ideas of sovereignty, democracy, peace and equality, emphasizing the differences between the pan-green and pan-blue camps. On one side there is Chen and the support of the majority of Taiwanese, and on the other is a complete lack of democracy with the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party. Chen's point in all this is that Taiwan's problems are not the result of the struggle between the pan-greens and the pan-blues, but the struggle between the greens and the reds. And isn't the failure of the passage of the arms procurement budget a direct result of this?
The president is committed to "always standing on the side of justice," and this is what the Taiwanese people expect of him. In this New Year's speech Chen expressed the government's resolve and its commitment to following through on it. That is where the real significance of the speech lies.
Chin Heng-wei is editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS