Prior to Taiwan’s second transfer of power on May 20, president-elect Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has promised to consider non-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) members for the Judicial Yuan, Examination Yuan and the Control Yuan, and a native Taiwanese to head the Straits Exchange Foundation.
This expression of goodwill is an attempt to heal the social rift following a fierce election battle, but That this is not what concerns the pan-green camp.
Pro-green voters are more concerned about the future development of cross-strait relations, transitional justice and the pan-blue camp’s treatment of the leaders of the current government and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
From a cross-strait perspective, Ma’s victory is a relief to Beijing but a concern for the green camp, since there is strong support both for “one country on each side” and “one China, with each side making its own interpretation.”
How can a balance be struck? More importantly, Beijing stresses “one China” while Taipei stresses “each side making its own interpretation.”
The international community accepts the former, but not the latter, making it difficult for Taiwan to join international organizations, although some countries pay lip service to “one China” while allowing the Republic of China (ROC) to establish unofficial representative offices and maintain membership in a few international organizations by calling itself an area.
“One China” is a curse both diplomatically and domestically. For example, at some international sports and cross-strait events in Taiwan, the host nation cannot even raise its own national flag. Also, in the 2005 meetings between Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜), neither Lien nor Soong mentioned democracy or the ROC, thus highlighting the pressure created by the “one China” principle. The question of how to get Beijing to step back and the Ma administration to move forward on a foundation trusted by the Taiwanese public is a challenge.
Although Taiwanese want to safeguard national awareness while longing for cross-strait stability, they understand the implied conflict. It will be Ma’s job to strike a balance that promotes the nation’s interests. Regardless of which direction he takes, it will be acceptable to most Taiwanese unless he is overly biased. If, however, pan-green supporters are worried, they might launch protests that could lead to questions being asked by moderate voters. To build long-term calm and stability, Ma should move slowly and promote transparency.
As for the treatment of pan-green leaders, the handling of the president’s special state affairs fund is a good example. These funds are similar in nature to the special allowance of government officials and prosecutors should treat them according to one standard. Furthermore, media outlets have been discussing whether Ma should pardon President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), causing pan-green supporters to wonder whether Chen’s lawsuit has been completed.
Chen, who is about to step down and become a private citizen, has the same right to be presumed innocence until proven guilty as everyone else. Even if the suggestion of a pardon is made out of goodwill, it is an insult to pan-green supporters. Ma must allow all cases to be handled by an independent judiciary.
Both camps are edgy and tense, which can easily lead to deteriorating relations. We have to rely on the open mindedness and reconciliatory abilities of the two camps’ leaderships, who should tread with caution.
Lee Wen-chung is a former DPP legislator.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
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.
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