In his April 30 interview with CNN reporter Christiane Amanpour, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) declared: “We will never ask the Americans to fight for Taiwan. This is something that is very, very clear.”
In other words, any dispute between Taiwan and China is a domestic affair and the US has no business interfering.
Since assuming office as president of the Republic of China two years ago, Ma has implemented many measures to advance his goal of surrendering Taiwan’s sovereignty to Beijing. This includes downgrading Taiwan’s international status, demolishing Taiwan’s democratic institutions (freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, judicial independence), opening the nation to Chinese white-collar workers and students, forcing the signing of an economic cooperation framework agreement despite opposition by a considerable segment of the population and enfeebling Taiwan’s military forces.
With the latest outburst, it is now very clear that Ma plans to sign a peace accord with China and offer Taiwan up to Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) on a silver platter before Hu leaves office in October 2012.
Ma is betraying the people of Taiwan, who were deceived by his promise to protect their right to self-determination, by subverting the Republic of China government to which he has pledged allegiance.
So what can the Taiwanese do to preserve their liberty, property and dignity? Many people are counting on a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) victory in the 2012 presidential election. With Ma’s low approval rating, this strategy may seem sensible, but it is not wise for freedom-loving Taiwanese to devote most of their energy and resources to the pursuit of electoral victory.
First, the DPP’s chances of regaining the presidency are small. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) still dominates the media. Its black gold electoral machine is solidly entrenched in rural areas and small towns. It still has vast financial resources (which can be buttressed by Beijing) to buy votes. The KMT-dominated legislature could pass a law enabling hundreds of thousands of Taiwanese businesspeople residing in China to send in absentee ballots and the Central Election Commission is now controlled by the KMT and its allies, who are not known for their love of fair play.
Second, winning the presidency may mean little, if the KMT government has already signed a peace accord with Beijing. If the new president tried to abrogate such a capitulation accord, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) could threaten to invade.
This does not mean that the Taiwanese should give up fighting the alien rule of the KMT through the ballot box. Such efforts should most certainly continue. The election of the mayors of the five major municipalities at the end of this year is important because victory would give the DPP control of the local police force, which should help restore freedom of assembly and peaceful protest and in countering the infiltration of Taiwan by Chinese intelligence and PLA agents. The point is one should not put all one’s eggs in one basket.
In terms of stopping Ma’s intensifying efforts to make Taiwan part of a de facto “one China,” massive street demonstrations are urgently needed.
If 1 million protesters periodically rally in the streets of Taipei, that will attract media attention worldwide. It is now the only way to let the international community know that the great majority of Taiwanese reject rule by the Chinese Communist Party and prefer to keep their hard-won freedoms.
Another objective would be to paralyze the government and compel Ma’s resignation. This could be achieved by surrounding the Presidential office and/or the legislature on a continuous, round-the-clock basis with a smaller contingent of 5,000 to 10,000 protesters. These volunteers could come from all around Taiwan on a rotating basis. Such a sustained effort would, of course, require planning, discipline and organization. It would also demand the unity and cooperation of all Taiwanese organizations that support Taiwan’s survival as an independent, democratic state.
In 1776, Thomas Jefferson proclaimed in the US Declaration of Independence:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government ... ”
What was true in the US in 1776 is just as true in Taiwan today.
Li Thian-hok is a freelance commentator based in Pennsylvania.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS