The farcical campaign to oust President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) continues even though the two slogans adopted by the red-clad protesters, "oppose corruption" and "beyond blue and green," are the most blatant of lies.
If the supporters of former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Shih Ming-teh (施明德) are really opposed to corruption, then they should first vehemently protest against the most corrupt party of any democratic country, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
This party unashamedly clings to the vast stock of assets it seized during its dictatorial rule over Taiwan and still refuses to return them -- even a decade after Taiwan became a democratic country.
The New York Times reported recently that the KMT is the wealthiest political party in the world. Well, of course. Is there any other party in the democratic world that has the gall to break the law as brazenly as the KMT? If one wants to talk about opposing graft, is there any corruption more in need of opposition than the KMT's pool of stolen assets?
Since Shih and his supporters demand that Chen and the DPP be held to "the highest moral standards," why don't they apply the most basic moral standards to the KMT and Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九)? By using two different standards to measure sleaze, this "anti-corruption" movement has shown itself to be nothing more than a tool for other purposes.
This is similar to a person who condemns sexual harassment but is silent on rape. It only shows that the condemnations are a red herring.
Politicians have always used such deceptions. In calling for Taiwan to go "beyond blue and green," Shih is engaging in similar behavior.
Some facts are indisputable. The pan-blue camp rejects Taiwan's right to become a normal and independent country. The pan-green camp wants to lead Taiwan down the path toward a new constitution, a change in its official title and nationhood.
If the anti-Chen movement really isn't about mainstream blue-green politics, then it should tolerate people of either political persuasion. But why is it that people who support an independent Taiwan at the anti-Chen rallies are abused by the red-clad demonstrators, actions for which Shih has often apologized?
Why is it that when the sea of anti-Chen protesters yells "long live the Republic of China" and "long live the Three Principles of the People," Shih is all smiles? Aren't his followers supposed to be above political division?
It is true that this movement, which the Chinese-language United Daily News calls a "green head with a blue body," has former green-camp followers in it, but its ideology is centered completely around the blue camp's anti-independence philosophy.
Therefore Shih's anti-Chen campaign is not only entirely unrelated to opposing corruption, but is also devoid of any truly bipartisan philosophy. Its nothing but a cover for yet another episode in the series of anti-Chen and anti-green-camp efforts the KMT has engaged in since the party refused to accept the verdict of the 2004 presidential election.
In essence, therefore, it is still about blue versus green, the old power versus the reformers, unification versus independence. But this time, they've lined up three different armies for the attack.
The first wave is Shih's "red army," the second wave is the KMT and waiting behind both is the Chinese Communist Party. They've come together under the pretext of toppling Chen, but it's just another attack on the pan-green camp and a democratically elected and pro-localization regime.
Cao Changqing is a freelance journalist based in the US.
Translated by Marc Langer
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under