Many years ago I had the opportunity to see former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Shih Ming-teh (施明德) at several small gatherings, and to listen to his impromptu speeches. The thing that made the deepest impression on me was his composure when talking about his past hardships. The way he spoke without a trace of agitation or hatred made me feel that he was a truly incredible person. During his speeches, my admiration for him only increased when he said that the only way he would enter China was with a regular visa, and never with a "Taiwan compatriot travel document" (台胞證). It seemed to me that he had suffered more than even Zhu Shunshui (朱舜水), the Chinese patriot who preferred to flee to Japan at the end of the Ming Dynasty and die in exile rather than bow his head to the Qing rulers.
I've recently heard Shih announce to the media that he wouldn't visit China if it refused to give up the use of violence against Taiwan. Although his stance seemed softer than it had been before, he retained a fortitude that his pan-blue and pan-green supporters and critics were incapable of. His words should have made many officials hang their heads in shame.
Many of the heavyweights who held important party, government and military posts during Taiwan's authoritarian era and constantly admonished the public to resist China now happily cross the strait to buddy up with the same people they used to condemn as communist bandits. For these people, it doesn't matter how many missiles China aims at Taiwan, nor how many of them are retired generals from the Whampoa Military Academy founded by Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石). They all still go in droves to China and look mockingly back at Taiwan, having completely forgotten what it was that Chiang taught them.
In comparison, Shih doesn't come from their same outstanding background, nor does he have particularly distinguished academic credentials to be haughty about. But when it comes to facing down a powerful neighbor, the steadfast moral fortitude that Shih displays far outshines many of those same political bigshots who used to condemn China. He indeed seems to be a copy of the beggar from a poem about the collapse of the Ming dynasty, where the beggar says that "the moral standards are only preserved in the lower classes" (
However, as much as I respect Shih for his determination in facing China, I'm afraid I am also disappointed by his campaign against President Chen Shui-bian (
In his early years, Shih stirred up dissent in his fight for Taiwanese independence. Although he seems to have abandoned this approach in recent years, localization, freedom and democracy should still be at the core of his ideology. Shih needs to take a step back and consider: Do the people who support his anti-Chen campaign share the same convictions and values as Shih does, or has he become their puppet?
Let's put aside supporters with a gangster background for now. Other supporters of Shih's anti-Chen sit-in protest include people from all walks of life: retired professors, popular and unpopular entertainers, esteemed artists and senior citizens. However, do these people really have even the most basic belief in freedom and democracy? Did they struggle for democracy and human rights in the past? What do they think about this land and its people deep down in their hearts? Is it a source of pride or of sorrow to have such supporters?
Today, Shih faces a dilemma. There can already be no turning back. If he turns his back on the protest, he will become isolated. But if he presses on, he will be responsible for more unrest. Still, with his past reputation and present momentum, it would not be difficult for Shih to choose another path and become a shared hero for both sides of the Taiwan Strait.
Perhaps Shih could redefine the protest as a campaign against Chinese oppression and the annexation of Taiwan and speak out in support of the Chinese people's fight for freedom and human rights. The scale of such a campaign would be far beyond that of the campaign against Chen. In this way, Shih could become not only an irreplaceable spiritual leader in Taiwan, but also a guardian and spokesman for the Chinese people. This great opportunity may disappear if he does not take it soon. I wonder if he has the vision and resolution to accept -- and be truly deserving of -- the halo of morality?
David Ming is a political commentator based in Taipei.
Translated by Marc Langer and Eddy Chang
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath