In 2008, President and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) expressed the hope that the KMT’s Youth Corps could “produce a [Chinese President] Hu Jintao” (胡錦濤). A classic remark, indeed, in view of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) bloody history and the fact that it still has more than 1,000 missiles targeting Taiwan. Ma’s hopes that the KMT can produce a communist-style leader reveals a complete ignorance of what “evil” means.
He is not alone. Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) recently praised Hu as being “rational” and “kind.” It is worrying that Taiwan’s two main political leaders hold such romantic views of Chinese communist rule.
Dictators are neither kind nor reasonable because a dictatorship is synonymous with violent rule. Hu had blood on his hands even before he became president. Just before the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, a protest broke out in Lhasa, and reports said hundreds of Tibetans may have been killed in the military crackdown. At the time, Hu was CCP party secretary in the Tibet Autonomous Region.
After he became president, the human rights situation in China has become even worse than under his predecessor, Jiang Zemin (江澤民). The persecution of Falun Gong practitioners, Christians and dissidents has intensified, as has the suppression of Tibetans and Uighurs. The CCP has also tightened its control over information and freedom of thought.
Nor has Hu displayed reason or kindness in the wake of the recent sinking of the South Korean warship Cheonan.
On May 20, an investigation team consisting of Swedish, British, Australian, Canadian and US experts released a report saying there was overwhelming evidence a North Korean submarine sank the ship on March 26, killing 46 South Korean sailors.
The international community condemned North Korean leader Kim Jong-il’s regime. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called it an invasion, Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama called it an unforgivable act, British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs William Hague said North Korea lacked respect for human life and Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd accused it of publicly violating the UN Charter and the armistice agreement between the two Koreas. Even the normally wishy-washy UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called the investigation findings “very disturbing.”
The Chinese government, however, has gone against international opinion. At the latest meeting between foreign ministers from China, Japan and South Korea, the Chinese minister said investigations should be “scientific and objective.” He did not condemn North Korea, and his tone implied that Beijing is preparing to challenge the investigation in favor of North Korea.
After the sinking of the Cheonan, Kim rushed off to Beijing, clearly to discuss with Hu how to handle the incident. Perhaps Hu encouraged Kim and offered Beijing’s support.
Clinton visited Beijing this week before heading to South Korea, possibly to persuade Hu not to favor Pyongyang since South Korea is preparing to seek redress through the UN Security Council.
When the report by the foreign team of experts came out, South Korea’s foreign ministry invited the ambassadors from China, Japan, Russia, the UK, France and about 30 other countries to attend the announcement of the results. Chinese Ambassador to Seoul Zhang Xinsen (張鑫森) declined the invitation. South Korean analysts believed Zhang was acting alone, while instead he represented the position of the Chinese. This could mean that Beijing might use its veto power in the Security Council to block sanctions against North Korea.
The only reason this evil little North Korean dares behave in this outrageous manner is because he has the backing of the big Chinese dictatorship. Hu has said in public that “China must learn from Cuba and North Korea,” as if China isn’t evil enough. Kim and Hu have once again proved that dictators are unreasonable. For democratic Taiwan to nurture illusions about a dictator is very dangerous.
Cao Changqing is a freelance writer based in the US.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG AND PERRY SVENSSON
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more
RSS