There are a number of people with deep blue convictions who fully support President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) policy of capitulation to China. Some of them even say he should be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Back in the real world, the similarities between Ma and the ill-fated last Ming emperor are all too obvious.
The Nobel Peace Prize might have become cheapened of late, but not to the extent that it should be awarded to a politician who would sacrifice freedom, democracy and human rights to a communist dictatorship.
Former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher did the same thing when she ceded the territory of Hong Kong to China, which is an undemocratic country with no respect for human rights — and I don’t recall her being nominated for the prize.
Taiwan is a democracy, but only as a result of the sacrifice and struggle of a colonized people: It was not easily come by.
All Taiwan wants is to maintain its autonomy, and it has no wish to threaten any other nation. Any politician that sacrifices Taiwan’s democracy and allows it to become a colony of totalitarian China would be worse than the last Ming emperor. What sense would the peace prize nomination make then?
China lovers could even consider Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) for nomination. He fits the bill perfectly and the prize would surely be his for the taking.
The Chinese seem to be good at casting things in a rosy light. It has certainly happened before.
Former Chinese paramount leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) circumvented using the words “communist dictatorship” with Orwellian aplomb, coining the phrase “socialism with Chinese characteristics.”
His move toward a capitalist model, leading the Chinese economy to a turn in fortunes, was dubbed China’s “rise.”
Hu is quite happy to bounce along the capitalist road and watch his country’s “rise,” but we all know that “Chinese characteristics” under a one-party dictatorship is, by any name, the sacrifice of democracy and the suppression of human rights.
Every moment of every day Beijing is in a state of paranoia about independence for Taiwan, Xinjiang and Tibet, afraid that people will call for freedom, democracy and human rights. If China is rising and becoming such a “great nation,” why would so many people be demanding independence?
This is one of those “rare historic opportunities” that Hu has talked of.
He should change his approach and adopt the magnanimity befitting a great nation. It would reinvent China’s image in an instant.
He could embrace a democratic system, guarantee human rights, respect the choice of the Taiwanese people and welcome the return of the Dalai Lama to Tibet and Rebiya Kadeer, the exiled Uighur leader, to Xinjiang, allowing self-rule for those regions.
A great nation on the rise should be able to demonstrate this kind of confidence.
If US President Barack Obama could win the Nobel Peace Prize, what is to stop Hu being nominated?
It wouldn’t hurt China to drop the idea of unification and allow Taiwan de jure independence, respecting the choice of Taiwanese.
Both sides would gain a peaceful co-existence, Hu would win the Nobel Peace Prize and Ma could avoid going down in history as a “last emperor.”
Now that’s what I call a win-win situation.
James Wang is a media commentator.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
Liberals have wasted no time in pointing to Karol Nawrocki’s lack of qualifications for his new job as president of Poland. He has never previously held political office. He won by the narrowest of margins, with 50.9 percent of the vote. However, Nawrocki possesses the one qualification that many national populists value above all other: a taste for physical strength laced with violence. Nawrocki is a former boxer who still likes to go a few rounds. He is also such an enthusiastic soccer supporter that he reportedly got the logos of his two favorite teams — Chelsea and Lechia Gdansk —
RSS