A letter to President Ma
Mr President,
Since you took office on May 20, you will no doubt have seen that the popularity of your policies and the public’s belief in your leadership have fallen considerably. Of course, in a democratic climate where very few media are impartial or objective it is hard to engage in constructive debate about complex policies in such a way to build genuine consensus. Just ask US president-elect Barack Obama.
Leading a country is a massive responsibility that comes with great recognition and honor but can also lead to shame and ignominy. A lack of information means that many citizens will no doubt judge you based upon the limited exposure they have to your ideas, and they are of course not aware of all the factors that may influence your decisions.
That being said, citizens are entitled to expect their president to actively lead and represent their country well. What separates former US president Franklin D. Roosevelt from US President George W. Bush and Sun Yat-sen (孫逸仙) from Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) is that the former saw their leaderships as duties that required sensitivity, restraint and intelligence, while the latter regarded their tenures as podiums for grandstanding, protecting personal business interests and lining their pockets. The former were refined, active and firm; the latter were crude, passive and aggressive.
In March, 57 percent of eligible voters chose you to protect their country and their interests and above all to act with the utmost respect for, and loyalty to, a nation they most commonly refer to as Taiwan. They heard you say you would protect “Taiwan” and they remember that you promised things would improve under your administration. Over 500,000 people recently gathered in Taipei to ask you why they haven’t.
A president needs to passionately love her or his country, the evidence of which is in their words and deeds. I have no doubt that you love a country, but I fear it is not the country beloved by at least two-thirds of the population who see in this native soil an inherent sovereignty. Instead, your prioritizing of the Republic of China (ROC), downgrading Taiwan to a region and your insistence on using the phrase “mainland” rather than “China” suggests an attempt to “re-Sinicize” Taiwanese.
After 12 years of rising identification with the “Taiwan country brand” it seems that Taiwanese are now being asked to once again regard their nationality as “Chinese” while retaining “Taiwanese,” “Hakka” and Aboriginal as their “local” identities.
Your conscientious observance of the ROC Constitution implies that you wish to lead as a model Chinese citizen in Taiwan.
If you insist on regarding Taiwan as a “local” part of the ROC, then you will at least need the ROC Constitution to be affirmed by voters through a referendum.
The Taiwanese have never been given the opportunity to vote for their own Constitution. This means that the existing document, and all its rules and institutions, have no popular mandate. Is this why there is little rule of law and heightened instability in this democracy?
Though you might wish otherwise, the name and identity of this nation are still undecided. The fate of democracy and freedom in Taiwan rests upon whether you are able to show sensitivity to this fact and respect the cultural heterogeneity of this, your sovereign country.
With my deepest respect, Sir.
Ben Goren
Taichung
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS