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
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS