Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu’s (陳菊) whirlwind visit to Beijing and Shanghai has shaken up Taiwan’s political scene. Radical independence supporters are outraged and anxious, while the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and its pan-blue allies can barely conceal their joy.
The pan-blues, who visit China more frequently, feel they have been painted as pro-China, communist-loving sellouts. But now Chen, a member of the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) Central Standing Committee and its highest-ranking local government official, has gone to China to promote Kaohsiung and the World Games, which will be held there in July.
Radical independence supporters, who have seen government officials groveling on trips to China, have now also seen DPP star Chen proclaiming the “one China” constitution and speaking of Kaohsiung and Xiamen as two cities in one country — all for the sake of getting Beijing to cooperate on the World Games.
They must be very worried.
But it is too early to conclude that Chen’s trip has relieved the pan-blues of their pro-China label. If Chen had kowtowed to her Chinese hosts like other Taiwanese politicians have, she would have been booed even by her own side.
But at a welcome ceremony for her in Beijing, Chen publicly referred to “our central government and President Ma Ying-jeou [馬英九],” and called the host country “China” rather than “the mainland.”
When news of this got back to Taiwan, the same people who had earlier phoned to complain about Chen’s China trip started sending each other e-mails and messages praising her for having more guts than the pan-blues.
With courage and insight, Chen chose the right moment to show that Taiwanese officials don’t need to belittle themselves, deny their own status and grovel before their Chinese counterparts.
Chen has come out of this looking a lot better than the pan-blues — including senior figures like KMT Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) and former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰), who toe the Beijing line by calling Ma “Taiwan’s leader” instead of “president.”
KMT politicians may declare their support for the idea that “there is one China, with each side having its own interpretation,” but what is their own interpretation worth when they have to use terms like “authorities” to describe Taiwan’s central government and dare not call their own leader “president”?
The pan-blue and pan-green camps disagree about “one China,” but while the pan-blues, all the way up to Wu and Lien, drop their own interpretation of “one China” as soon as they set foot on the other side of the Taiwan Strait, Chen has spoken up for Taiwan.
Chen’s conduct on her visit to Beijing was calm and collected, appropriate for her status and mission, neither lowly nor haughty.
By comparison, Department of Health Minister Yeh Ching-chuan’s (葉金川) performance at the World Health Assembly in Geneva looked quite ridiculous.
On China’s insistence, the WHO classifies Taiwan as a province of China and lists Taiwanese ports as Chinese ones.
That did not detract from Yeh’s joy as he took his seat as an observer in the assembly, or stop him grinning like the Cheshire Cat when a Chinese delegate patted him on the shoulder. It was a different matter when some students queried Taiwan’s status at the assembly.
Yeh blew his top. He said objecting to Taiwan being classified as a province of China by the WHO and demanding equal treatment made Taiwan look “lousy.” But being a lousy country is the least of Taiwan’s worries.
If we’ve already become someone else’s province, we are no longer a country at all — lousy or otherwise. According to Yeh’s logic, Chen’s courteous yet determined insistence on highlighting the equal status of China and Taiwan during her visit to Beijing must be “lousy” too.
Then Ma backed everything Yeh said.
Comparing Chen with the pan-blue camp, it is sad to say that the mayor has put the president in the shade. An opposition politician has done more to uphold Ma’s dignity than the ruling party has.
So Chen deserves credit from the pan-blues not just for going to China, but for her contribution to upholding Taiwan’s national dignity.
Chen’s China trip should also dispel worries among some people in the pan-green camp that anyone who goes to Beijing will have their status undermined and that Taiwanese can’t stand up for themselves.
At the same time, it throws up a serious new question for the DPP and its allies to consider. If even Chen can go to Beijing, then is it not time to reconsider the policy that DPP Legislator Chen Wen-chung (陳文忠) called “turning our backsides to China forever?”
The opposition urgently needs to work out how it can approach China with a suitable degree of goodwill, flexibility and pragmatism while sticking to its principles.
Chen Chu, as a DPP mayor, deserves a lot of credit for going to China and defending the dignity of her own party’s pan-blue rivals.
Ever since Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was president, it has been common for Taiwanese politicians to turn to outsiders to attack their domestic rivals — to turn to a country that stands opposed to Taiwan to undermine their own president and government.
This situation is most unfortunate. We should take a cue from Chen Chu’s Beijing trip to draw a clear line between domestic infighting and foreign policy. When dealing with other countries, we need to stand together to defend our interests.
Lin Cho-shui is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
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
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry