Circus maestro P.T. Barnum would be proud of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Su Chi (
In his latest salvo of unverifiable claims, Su has supposedly relied on a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) central executive committee member to tell the world that the DPP government is to start developing nuclear weapons, but not without finding an escape route for President Chen Shui-bian (
Like so many of his colleagues, Su has a record of disseminating bogus information and then retracting it -- but only if called on it by the aggrieved parties. Sober analysts will therefore take his grandstanding with several pillars of salt, especially given that KMT presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (
And for Su to suggest that Taiwan is becoming a North Korean-style state is typical of his idiocy and contempt for the Taiwanese public, but he has also failed to explain why Chen, presumably a Kim Jong-il in the making, would seek asylum in the US if he were angling to be this country's next dictator.
Yet Su has touched on an interesting issue. If there is any truth to his words, then it appears that the Taiwanese government is learning from trends in Northeast Asia and the Middle East: Drop the "N" word and people start to take you very seriously. In Taiwan's case that would be a welcome change.
We look forward to people less predictable than Premier Chang Chun-hsiung (
Su serves on the legislative National Defense Committee, and on Wednesday he justified the committee slashing the military's missile budget by saying that it would provoke China.
Such a landmark action and reasoning by the KMT would ordinarily ring alarm bells all the way to the White House. But these are not ordinary times, and the White House appears just as clueless about the agenda of the KMT as it was at the beginning of the Bush administration.
The KMT is fast shedding any pretense of being a "nationalist" party in opposition to its communist foe. Its latest act indicates that -- in strategic and ideological terms -- it is settling comfortably into the role of proxy for the Chinese Communist Party.
For years now KMT politicians have been making trips to Beijing that compromised national security -- all as Taiwan's intelligence and security services sat on their hands. And in almost every action it has taken since 2000, the KMT has ensured that Taiwan's ability to defend itself would be retarded in the face of China's malevolent and growing strength.
It is clear that Ma Ying-jeou's various protestations against Beijing's ill treatment of its subjects amount to little more than fluff.
The big picture is this: Even if Ma were sincere about protecting Taiwan's democracy, his hardliner party machine is not. His inability to control the hardliners indicates that his election would bring back to power the kinds of people that most Taiwanese had assumed wilted away sometime after the end of martial law.
The KMT has blustered for years about what to do with the cross-strait impasse. It has lectured us on restraint and the "status quo." But this week it has reached its tipping point: It is now attempting to have the "status quo" collapse irreversibly in China's favor.
Which brings us back to Barnum: The more flamboyant the denials from the KMT, the better. But when it comes to cross-strait punditry, and especially in the US, there are suckers born every minute.
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