On the eve of the second anniversary of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) inauguration, Taiwan Thinktank released the results of a public opinion poll showing that his approval rating stood at a mere 32.1 percent, while 58.6 percent of respondents said they were dissatisfied with his performance. The top reason cited for their dissatisfaction was Ma’s “pro-China policies and neglect of national sovereignty.” This was followed by a “poor economy” and “failure to care for the general public.” The results of the opinion poll show a fundamental flaw in Ma’s policymaking.
The government is leaning toward China not only because of Ma’s personal ideology, but also because of his belief in the “one China” paradigm, which has limited his perspective and even distorted his understanding of reality.
The “one China” paradigm has led him to believe that China’s economy can develop independently of the world economy and that, so long as Taiwan’s economy is integrated with China’s, Taiwan will become “a little giant by standing on the shoulders of the great giant.”
As early as 2007 or 2008, there were already special media reports describing how the financial crisis adversely affected Taiwanese businesspeople in China. However, Ma chose to ignore them and continued to praise reliance on China, saying there was nothing to fear from the global financial crisis, and campaigned for office with his famous “6-3-3” policy (annual GDP growth of 6 percent, annual per capita income of US$30,000 and an unemployment rate of less than 3 percent). He also promised that business in Kaohsiung would take off as soon as direct links were established and that China’s policy of encouraging people living in rural areas to purchase household appliances would help Taiwan ride out the economic storm.
However, because of its blind belief in the “one China” paradigm, the government does not seem to care that these election promises have failed one after the other, and that its credibility is shot.
Believing that economics is the only solution, the government has overwhelmingly increased its stake in China. Despite the fact that unemployment has risen as a result of the “active opening up” policy initiated by former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) administration in 2001 — creating a business model through which Taiwanese companies receive orders in Taiwan but manufacture the products in China, leading to a flood of Taiwanese businesses relocating to China over the past 10 years — the Ma administration has continued to blindly push this policy.
In order to pander to Beijing and increase Taiwan’s economic reliance on China, the government has repeatedly compromised Taiwan’s sovereignty. When Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) visited Taiwan two years ago, clashes erupted as police chased after Taiwanese to stop them from displaying the national flag. The Presidential Office then declared a diplomatic truce, which placed cross-strait relations above diplomacy and promoted the idea that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are two regions of the same country.
When Typhoon Morakot hit in August last year, the government refused to allow US helicopters to take part in rescue efforts because it was afraid of antagonizing China. Through all these events, Ma has never been able to explain to the public whether he is the president of a sovereign country or the leader of a Chinese satellite state.
Improvements in cross-strait relations are a good thing and have met approval in Taiwan, but kowtowing so readily to Beijing has also raised public concern and increasingly strained government credibility.
It seems the three issues causing the most public discontent are all closely related to the “one China” approach. Unless the government can bring about a paradigm shift, it will not be able to resolve the credibility crisis for the remainder of Ma’s presidency.
Lin Cho-shui is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
RSS