Clash of views on Ma
I read with interest one of your editorials published this week (“Is Ma the ‘Manchurian Candidate?’” July 8, page 8). I am concerned that the rather ambiguous wording of your piece may have made it look like it is my personal opinion that President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has finally adopted Beijing’s views and will do what it wants him to do — that he has become, as your paper put it, “Beijing’s man in Taipei, who will open the gates of the castle and bring about the dream of annexation.”
I would like to clarify that this is not my view. I believe that Ma does have a rational strategy that puts Taiwan first. The Ma administration came into office on a platform of making improvements in cross-strait relations one of its top priorities, but also promised to strengthen Taiwan’s bilateral relations with other states, to campaign for membership in international organizations and to harden Taiwan’s defense capabilities.
I am disappointed, however, that putting cross-strait relations before foreign and defense policy has allowed the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to interpret Ma’s acceptance of the so-called “1992 Consensus” as meaning that Taiwan is part of the PRC and that his victory merely represents a defeat of the “forces of Taiwanese independence.” Before the presidential election, there were indications that the PRC was prepared to make some concessions to Taiwan and even begin what could have been an exciting rethinking of its views on sovereignty and national identity and giving Taiwan more international space. Instead, we see a continuing lack of flexibility over key issues such as Taiwan’s membership in the WHO, while the modernization of the People’s Liberation Army’s missile forces opposite Taiwan is worrying. In this context the beginning of direct air links is only a modest achievement.
It is still early for the new administration, however, and foreign and defense policy might well unfold in ways that can balance the pressure from the PRC. While I would certainly not label Ma the “Manchurian Candidate,” there will always be a need for Taiwan to balance cross-strait policy with a clear message to the PRC and the international community about what the people of Taiwan want in terms of its international status. I am sure that this will emerge in time.
Christopher Hughes
London School of Economics
Editor’s note: Dr Hughes’ comments were sourced from a piece by Tania Branighan in the Guardian newspaper (carried by the Taipei Times as “Welcome, and please don’t spit,” July 6, page 2) in which Hughes is quoted as saying: “Their [Chinese officials and academics] way of thinking was: ‘Taiwan’s come to our way of thinking; Ma’s going to do what we want him to’ … The question is: What is Taiwan getting out of this?” It was not the Taipei Times’ intention to attribute those views to Dr Hughes.
I have followed the human rights and the political situation in China since Mao Zedong (毛澤東) died in 1976. I have visited China on three occasions and Taiwan six times. I have had two private audiences with His Holiness the Dalai Lama and spent many hours with Chinese dissidents Wei Jingsheng (魏京生) and Fang Lizhi (方勵之). Falun Gong world spokesman Zhang Er-ping is a good friend of mine. I have talked in person with former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) as well as former Democratic Progressive Party chairman Lin I-hsiung (林義雄).
There is no doubt that the dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party under former Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) and President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) is one of the most brutal and cruel in the world today. It harasses, imprisons, tortures and kills its own people. It is systematically destroying the culture and religion in Tibet. A bamboo gulag of political prisoners stretches across the vast reaches of China. Organ harvesting from living Falun Gong prisoners was widespread until exposed by Canadian investigators. It should therefore be no surprise that Beijing lies, cheats, spies and steals. Meanwhile, Taiwan’s vibrant, transparent and successful democracy continues to be a major and festering thorn in Beijing’s side.
I am sure I am not the only one to have noticed that since the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government was installed in May, cross-strait tensions have thawed faster than a polar ice cap. Bilateral offices are being mulled, face-to-face meetings scheduled, direct flights launched and business opportunities expanded.
Like a wily fisherman using Lien Chan (連戰) as bait, Beijing has hooked President Ma Ying-jeou (or rather, as Beijing would have it, “Taipei’s Mr Ma”) long before the election. Now they are just playing with him. When the time is right, Beijing will reel him in and issue an ultimatum that will significantly compromise Taiwan’s sovereignty and dignity. If Ma gives in, Taiwanese will rise up in outrage. If he balks, they will see that he was taken for a fool.
The level of espionage will also likely increase along with the flood of new “visitors” from China.
China does not need missiles or military force to assimilate Taiwan. All it needs is to make Taiwan (“Chinese Taipei” in the KMT lexicon) a dependent economic colony and threaten a fatal economic earthquake by abruptly severing all business ties. If this occurred, Taiwan would fall to its knees before its master.
Former president Chen Shiu-bian (陳水扁) understood all this and acted accordingly. The good people of Taiwan will need to remain alert, hyper-vigilant and outspoken in the months and years ahead.
William Cox
Nome, Alaska
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.