President Ma Ying-jeou's (馬英九) inaugural speech can be summed up in two short phrases: Compromise outweighs conviction; emotion overrides reason.
Ma made satisfying China a priority in his speech, quoting Chinese President Hu Jintao’s (胡錦濤) three talks on cross-strait relations on March 26, April 12 and April 29, then concluding that “His views are very much in line with our own.”
And it came as no surprise that the speech was quickly approved by China’s Taiwan Affairs Office, despite it lacking the conviction that the president of a young democracy should deliver.
Is Ma not aware that the terms “controversies” and “differences” in Hu’s proposal to “shelve controversies” and “find commonalities despite differences” also imply that China is refusing to recognize Taiwan as an independent, sovereign state?
This is a Chinese trick to annex Taiwan through its United Front scheme — or maybe even military force. As a popularly elected president, Ma should insist that Taiwan’s independence and sovereignty brook no violation, disavowal or delay.
Ma should not forget that, in May 1996, Taiwan’s first popularly elected president, Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), clearly said at the beginning of his inaugural speech: “Today, 21.3 million compatriots are officially entering a new era, under which sovereignty is in the hands of the people!”
But Ma said: “In resolving cross-strait issues, what matters is not sovereignty but core values and way of life.”
Wrong. Even if core values and way of life on the two sides of the Taiwan Strait were to move toward unity in a distant future, China would have no right to annex Taiwan — just like the UK has no right to annex the US simply because they share similar core values and ways of life.
There are now two countries and two systems on the two sides of the Strait: a young democracy and an old, authoritarian communist state.
Taiwan would be better off introducing China to its advanced values and way of life so that some day they can be “two countries, one system.” But Taiwan should not annex China, and should not tolerate annexation by China, either now or in the future.
In his speech, Ma won the most applause by saying: “I am forever grateful to Taiwan’s society for accepting and nurturing this postwar immigrant. I will protect Taiwan with all my heart and resolutely move forward, and do my very best!”
This is an emotional appeal to the Taiwanese people, and such expression of true emotions is praiseworthy. Regretfully, emotions will only touch others temporarily, as they obscure paucity of reason. Unlike Lee, Ma failed to clearly point out the direction of Taiwan’s development in the next era.
Where will Ma’s “resolutely moving forward and doing his very best” lead Taiwan? He proposed no rational goal or strategy in his speech. He seems to pin Taiwan’s fate on consultations with Hu “over Taiwan’s international space and a possible cross-strait peace accord,” and finding “a way to attain peace and co-prosperity.”
But Ma should understand that, as China attempts to annex Taiwan by its United Front work and military force in conjunction with the “Anti-Secession” Law, peace and co-prosperity is merely empty talk.
Ma’s speech raised a question mark. With compromise outweighing conviction and emotion overriding reason, his proposal is, at best, a short-term fix.
After compromising with China and speaking emotionally to Taiwanese, then what? Where is he leading Taiwan?
Ruan Ming is a consultant at the Taiwan Research Institute.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
There has been much catastrophizing in Taiwan recently about America becoming more unreliable as a bulwark against Chinese pressure. Some of this has been sparked by debates in Washington about whether the United States should defend Taiwan in event of conflict. There also were understandable anxieties about whether President Trump would sacrifice Taiwan’s interests for a trade deal when he sat down with President Xi (習近平) in late October. On top of that, Taiwan’s opposition political leaders have sought to score political points by attacking the Lai (賴清德) administration for mishandling relations with the United States. Part of this budding anxiety
The diplomatic dispute between China and Japan over Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s comments in the Japanese Diet continues to escalate. In a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, China’s UN Ambassador Fu Cong (傅聰) wrote that, “if Japan dares to attempt an armed intervention in the cross-Strait situation, it would be an act of aggression.” There was no indication that Fu was aware of the irony implicit in the complaint. Until this point, Beijing had limited its remonstrations to diplomatic summonses and weaponization of economic levers, such as banning Japanese seafood imports, discouraging Chinese from traveling to Japan or issuing
On Nov. 8, newly elected Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) and Vice Chairman Chi Lin-len (季麟連) attended a memorial for White Terror era victims, during which convicted Chinese Communist Party (CCP) spies such as Wu Shi (吳石) were also honored. Cheng’s participation in the ceremony, which she said was part of her efforts to promote cross-strait reconciliation, has trapped herself and her party into the KMT’s dark past, and risks putting the party back on its old disastrous road. Wu, a lieutenant general who was the Ministry of National Defense’s deputy chief of the general staff, was recruited
Tokyo-Beijing relations have been rapidly deteriorating over the past two weeks as China tries to punish Japan over Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks about Taiwan earlier this month, and the off-ramp to this conflict is yet to be seen. Takaichi saying that a “Taiwan contingency” could cause a “situation threatening Japan’s survival” — which would allow Japan to act in self-defense — has drawn Beijing’s ire and sparked retaliatory measures. Her remark did not gain public attention until Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) made an apparent threat to behead her. The two sides lodged protests against each
RSS