Yesterday marked the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre, but the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) still shows no sign of readdressing the events of June 4, 1989.
This year the CCP increased suppression of those calling for a reappraisal of the killings ahead of the anniversary. Police sealed off the square, forced dissidents out of Beijing, while the authorities blocked Web sites capable of hosting discussion of Tiananmen or even for mentioning the name.
The apparent unwillingness of officials to even allow mention of 1989 is a sign that reassessment of the brutal crackdown — when Chinese troops opened fire on unarmed students protesting corruption and advocating democratic reform — is further away than ever.
The US-based Freedom House released a study entitled Undermining Democracy yesterday to coincide with the anniversary. The chapter on China notes: “the ideological standing of the CCP was at an all-time low” following the crackdown, but in the 20 years since then the CCP’s standing has been revived by China’s “economic boom and revived Han chauvinism.”
Nowadays, the report said, China is in such a strong position that fellow authoritarian states openly tout the Chinese system as a viable alternative to Western-style democracy, while Chinese officials have begun to consider the possibility that their development model may be exportable.
The authors say that key to this seeming rise to respectability has been China’s co-opting of terms such as “democracy,” “human rights” and the “rule of law,” and redefining them to suit its own interests, while touting its relations with other countries as “win-win.”
What is worrying for people in Taiwan, as the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) continues its headlong dash to Beijing’s bosom, is the manner in which the KMT has begun to parrot the CCP’s favorite buzzwords.
In its statement issued on Wednesday to mark the Tiananmen Massacre, the KMT said: “Freedom and human rights, democracy, and law and order are … the common goals pursued by both sides of the Taiwan Strait.”
“Cross-strait development and a win-win situation in economic cooperation are what we are working toward,” it said.
The KMT did not feel the need to condemn the CCP nor ask it to apologize. Instead it asked Chinese leaders to ensure there would be no repeat of the “unfortunate incident.”
The KMT’s indifference to the killings 20 years ago and its insincerity in calling for human rights were compounded when the party blocked a resolution in the legislature on Wednesday that sought a Chinese apology and reassessment of the “miscarriage of justice” surrounding the Tiananmen Massacre.
People must not let themselves be distracted by President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) annual show of concern — however wan — because he does not represent wider opinion in a party whose leaders have never been willing to shake off autocratic tendencies.
Taiwanese have already had a taste of how close the KMT’s interpretation of the “rule of law” resembles the CCP’s during last November’s protests against the visit of Chinese negotiator Chen Yunlin (陳雲林).
As the 20th anniversary of these tragic events passes, Taiwanese may soon find themselves faced with a crucial decision on how close they want to get to China. But whatever they decide, they must ensure that any rapprochement respects the time-honored conceptions of “democracy” and “human rights,” and not the sophistry of the KMT or the CCP.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Taiwan’s business-friendly environment and science parks designed to foster technology industries are the key elements of the nation’s winning chip formula, inspiring the US and other countries to try to replicate it. Representatives from US business groups — such as the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, and the Arizona-Taiwan Trade and Investment Office — in July visited the Hsinchu Science Park (新竹科學園區), home to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) headquarters and its first fab. They showed great interest in creating similar science parks, with aims to build an extensive semiconductor chain suitable for the US, with chip designing, packaging and manufacturing. The
RSS