Likening former Democratic Progressive Party chairman Shih Ming-teh (
Dissident writer Cao Changqing (
Yesterday Cao told a press conference that the tactics of the Shih team resembled those used to whip up hysteria and violence in China's most infamous phase of the modern era.
Cao is not speaking mischievously. He is from China and knows what the Cultural Revolution did -- and is still doing, in pernicious ways -- to China. He supports Taiwan's right of self-determination, however it may manifest itself.
What Cao does not seem to understand is that the social and historical circumstances that shape Taiwanese behavior do not lend themselves to casual comparisons of Taiwanese protests to Chinese mass insanity.
In the Cultural Revolution, a people's youthful enthusiasm for bettering their country was nourished and manipulated by a charismatic thug to annihilate rivals within the Chinese Communist Party and groups within society that had the potential to weaken his grip on power.
It wasn't just about purging senior politicians and having a gullible proletariat let off some steam. It was about brainwashing millions of people, including children, into abandoning basic values of loyalty and propriety in the service of a cult leader's personal agenda. It was about killing as many ordinary people as necessary to protect that agenda.
It was a power play that nearly ruined a nation already suffering from the stupidity of the Great Leap Forward. And thirty years on, the social and spiritual effects of that era remain embedded in the Chinese psyche, including, in all likelihood, the fear of it coming to pass all over again in some form.
China's self-fulfilling prophecy of "chaos" therefore gives its rulers license to oppress, and temporary economic euphoria deflates the efforts of those who would lobby for a just and stable political structure.
Taiwanese do not have this history. Under Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) rule there was savagery, but power was distributed sufficiently broadly -- and US oversight was sufficiently alert -- such that the "Republic of China" as a whole could work at making things better. And for most people, things got a lot better.
While there is a chance of conflict if Shih's campaign proceeds with its nationwide roadshow, there is no chance of this campaign appealing to Taiwan's "masses" -- as a mass revolution must -- because the economic interests of the great majority of Taiwanese are in conflict with the simplistic and naive (and disingenuous) messages of revolution and purity that the campaign is disseminating.
Put more simply, you can't stage a revolution on the back of complimentary lunch boxes.
Perhaps it was the color of these protesters' shirts that sent Cao Changqing over the edge and prompted him to warn of pending disaster. And he does make good points about the psychology of those involved and the techniques of organizers in rallying them.
Nevertheless, Cao would be doing his listeners and readers a service if he were to ease off on the alarmist rhetoric and factor in some positive attributes of this nation that will defuse a serious escalation: mutual respect, a sense of local community and, above all, a sense of perspective.
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