Dear President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九),
During the past year, we, the undersigned — scholars and writers from the US, Canada, Asia, Europe and Australia — have publicly expressed to your government our concerns about a number of trends and developments in Taiwan. On Nov. 6, 2008, and again on Dec. 2 in letters to Minister of Justice Wang Ching-feng (王清峰), we focused on the issues of erosion of justice, significant flaws in the judicial system and judicial abuses against members of the democratic opposition.
On Jan. 21, 2009, and again on May 21, we addressed two open letters to you, Mr. President, expressing concern about the fairness of the judicial system, as well as erosion of press freedom and democratic checks and balances.
We regret to say that the responses received from Government Information Office (GIO) Minister Su Jun-pin (蘇俊賓) did not adequately address the issues raised, nor have we seen any substantive ameliorative steps taken to correct the problems.
Since then, a number of developments have taken place — some positive and some negative — which prompted us to write to you again to express our views on these issues. We wish to reiterate that we raise these points as strong international supporters of Taiwan’s democracy who care deeply about the country and its future as a free and democratic nation.
We also emphasize that we do not take sides in internal political debates, but do have Taiwan’s international image and credibility as an international partner in mind. Because of the hard work and perseverance of the Taiwanese people, Taiwan was able to make the transition to democracy two decades ago.
We applaud this achievement and strongly believe that this basic fact, democracy, is the strongest card Taiwan can play in building and strengthening its relations with other countries around the world and the strongest protection against outside interference in Taiwan’s internal affairs.
We are sure that you would agree with us that Taiwan’s young democracy can only grow and prosper if it is nurtured through good governance, accountability and transparency based on the fundamental principles of freedom, democracy, justice and human rights. This would also adhere to both the letter and spirit of the two UN human rights covenants signed by you and ratified by the Legislative Yuan, and be enhanced by the implementation of these covenants into national law in accordance with the advice of the International Commission of Jurists.
During the past two decades, Taiwan has made major progress in each of these areas. It thus has been a disappointment for us to see an erosion of justice, a weakening of checks and balances in the democratic system and a decline in press freedom in Taiwan.
These trends are reflected in the significantly downward ratings Taiwan received in the annual reports of international organizations such as Freedom House and Reporters without Borders.
They are also reflected in the expressions of concern by international scholars and friends of Taiwan related to the flaws in the judicial proceedings against former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and the apparent lack of neutrality in the continuing “investigations” and indictments of other prominent members of the former DPP government. We thus appeal to you again to ensure that measures are taken to ensure the impartiality and fairness of the judiciary.
Good governance, accountability and transparency based on the fundamental principles of freedom, democracy, justice and human rights are all the more essential now that your government is moving Taiwan on a path of closer economic ties with China. We believe that a decrease of tension across the Taiwan Strait would indeed be welcome, but emphasize that this should not be done at the expense of the hard-won democracy and human rights in Taiwan itself.
Thus, the process of improving relations with your large neighbor across the Taiwan Strait needs to be an open, deliberative and democratic process, in full consultation with both the Legislative Yuan and the democratic opposition, and fully transparent to the general public.
We are thus pleased to hear that officials of your government have stated that any agreement with China would need to have both a domestic consensus, including approval by the Legislative Yuan, and acceptance by the international community.
We trust this process will be open and consultative in ways that respect the democratic traditions begun so promisingly two decades ago. Indeed, we emphasize that a country can only grow and prosper if it has diversified ties — economically and politically — to other countries.
Too close an embrace with one neighbor will expose that country to the risks of volatility in the neighboring country, in particular if that neighbor remains authoritarian and openly disrespectful of Taiwan’s democratic achievements.
Mr. President, we wish to emphasize again that, as international scholars and writers who have followed, supported and applauded Taiwan’s impressive transition to democracy, we feel strongly that Taiwan should be more fully accepted by the international community as a full and equal partner.
This can only be achieved if Taiwan ensures that its democratic achievements are safeguarded, that its sovereignty, human rights and fundamental freedoms are protected, and that the democratic fabric of society is strengthened so the country is ready to meet the challenges ahead.
Former chairman, American Institute in Taiwan
Formosan Association for Public Affairs, Washington
Author, “The Coming Collapse of China”
Professor of political science and East Asian studies, University of Wisconsin
Professor of economics, City College of New York
Associate professor of political science, China and Taiwan studies,
University of Lyon
Chairman, Taiwan Corner, Copenhagen
JUNE TEUFEL DREYER
Professor of political science, University of Miami
Former senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation and former officer at the Taiwan Coordination Desk, Department of State, Washington
Executive director, Formosa Foundation, Los Angeles
MICHAEL RAND HOARE
Emeritus reader at the University of London
Professor of international relations, London School of Economics and Political Science
Former chief of staff to the late senator Claiborne Pell, Washington
Professor of Asian languages and studies, Monash University
Professor emeritus of history, Hamline University
Associate professor, National Taipei University (retired). David Kilgour
Former member of parliament and secretary of state for Asia-Pacific
Associate professor, School of Political Studies,
University of Ottawa
Associate professor, School of International Relations,
University of Southern California
Visiting fellow, The Brookings Institution, Washington
Professor of Chinese language and literature, University of Pennsylvania
Associate professor of political science, Austin College
Associate professor, Department of International Trade, Overseas Chinese Institute of Technology, chair of Austrian Association
of East Asian Studies
Associate professor, University of Ottawa, Canada
York Center for Asia Research, Toronto
Professor emeritus of
East Asian Studies,
Professor of law,
Lauder professor of international relations, University of Pennsylvania
VINCENT WEI-CHENG WANG
Professor of political science, University of Richmond
GERRIT VAN DER WEES
Editor of “Taiwan Communique,” Washington
President of DC Asia Advisory and former deputy assistant to the US vice president for national
With a new White House document in May — the “Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China” — the administration of US President Donald Trump has firmly set its hyper-competitive line to tackle geoeconomic and geostrategic rivalry, followed by several reinforcing speeches by Trump and other Cabinet-level officials. By identifying China as a near-equal rival, the strategy resonates well with the bipartisan consensus on China in today’s severely divided US. In the face of China’s rapidly growing aggression, the move is long overdue, yet relevant for the maintenance of the international “status quo.” The strategy seems to herald a new
To say that this year has been eventful for China and the rest of the world would be something of an understatement. First, the US-China trade dispute, already simmering for two years, reached a boiling point as Washington tightened the noose around China’s economy. Second, China unleashed the COVID-19 pandemic on the world, wreaking havoc on an unimaginable scale and turning the People’s Republic of China into a common target of international scorn. Faced with a mounting crisis at home, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) rashly decided to ratchet up military tensions with neighboring countries in a misguided attempt to divert the
Toward the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) final term in office, there was much talk about his legacy. Ma himself would likely prefer history books to enshrine his achievements in reducing cross-strait tensions. He might see his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore in 2015 as the high point. However, given his statements in the past few months, he might be remembered more for contributing to the breakup of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). We are still talking about Ma and his legacy because it is inextricably tied to the so-called “1992 consensus” as the bedrock of his
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) on Sept. 6 finished its annual national congress. However, if Taiwan wants to have a viable opposition party in its democracy, the results were far from satisfying. The KMT again seems to be caught in a time loop, like that one in the 1993 film Groundhog Day. Yet, unlike the protagonist in that film, the KMT seems unable to learn from past experience and change for the better. Instead, it remains locked in its never-ending cycle of repeating the past. To borrow from a different artistic genre, the KMT echoes Pete Seeger’s song Where Have All