Yesterday marked the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre, but the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) still shows no sign of readdressing the events of June 4, 1989.
This year the CCP increased suppression of those calling for a reappraisal of the killings ahead of the anniversary. Police sealed off the square, forced dissidents out of Beijing, while the authorities blocked Web sites capable of hosting discussion of Tiananmen or even for mentioning the name.
The apparent unwillingness of officials to even allow mention of 1989 is a sign that reassessment of the brutal crackdown — when Chinese troops opened fire on unarmed students protesting corruption and advocating democratic reform — is further away than ever.
The US-based Freedom House released a study entitled Undermining Democracy yesterday to coincide with the anniversary. The chapter on China notes: “the ideological standing of the CCP was at an all-time low” following the crackdown, but in the 20 years since then the CCP’s standing has been revived by China’s “economic boom and revived Han chauvinism.”
Nowadays, the report said, China is in such a strong position that fellow authoritarian states openly tout the Chinese system as a viable alternative to Western-style democracy, while Chinese officials have begun to consider the possibility that their development model may be exportable.
The authors say that key to this seeming rise to respectability has been China’s co-opting of terms such as “democracy,” “human rights” and the “rule of law,” and redefining them to suit its own interests, while touting its relations with other countries as “win-win.”
What is worrying for people in Taiwan, as the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) continues its headlong dash to Beijing’s bosom, is the manner in which the KMT has begun to parrot the CCP’s favorite buzzwords.
In its statement issued on Wednesday to mark the Tiananmen Massacre, the KMT said: “Freedom and human rights, democracy, and law and order are … the common goals pursued by both sides of the Taiwan Strait.”
“Cross-strait development and a win-win situation in economic cooperation are what we are working toward,” it said.
The KMT did not feel the need to condemn the CCP nor ask it to apologize. Instead it asked Chinese leaders to ensure there would be no repeat of the “unfortunate incident.”
The KMT’s indifference to the killings 20 years ago and its insincerity in calling for human rights were compounded when the party blocked a resolution in the legislature on Wednesday that sought a Chinese apology and reassessment of the “miscarriage of justice” surrounding the Tiananmen Massacre.
People must not let themselves be distracted by President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) annual show of concern — however wan — because he does not represent wider opinion in a party whose leaders have never been willing to shake off autocratic tendencies.
Taiwanese have already had a taste of how close the KMT’s interpretation of the “rule of law” resembles the CCP’s during last November’s protests against the visit of Chinese negotiator Chen Yunlin (陳雲林).
As the 20th anniversary of these tragic events passes, Taiwanese may soon find themselves faced with a crucial decision on how close they want to get to China. But whatever they decide, they must ensure that any rapprochement respects the time-honored conceptions of “democracy” and “human rights,” and not the sophistry of the KMT or the CCP.
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing