No statements seem too ridiculous in Taiwan, with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and its unbelievable claims. The KMT promotes national policies that bear no relation to the realities on the streets and in the homes of Taiwan. What Taiwan needs is not a fantasy world, but a sustainable future based on harmony between national policies, the wishes of the population and the realities of Taiwan today.
A few examples illustrate the upside-down perspective of Taiwan’s relationship with China, such as President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) considering himself president of China and Taiwan, despite the fact that the whole world recognizes Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) as the president of China.
It also makes no sense to say that the recently signed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) is between “two regions” in the Republic of China, and to claim that the agreement upholds Taiwan’s sovereignty based on a non-existent “1992 consensus” about “one China.”
The government has promised “no unification” during Ma’s presidency. Therefore, it also appears illogical to promote unification by calling China’s response “pragmatic,” as the presidential spokeman did after China emphasized that Singapore “should recognize China’s sovereignty over Taiwan” when Taiwan and Singapore initiated talks about a trade deal.
The negative consequences for Taiwan because of these statements are twofold: First, they portray Taiwan as a part of China to the international community. This would be a reasonable policy if the Taiwanese approved, but they do not. More than 80 percent of the public said no to China’s “one country, two systems” policy in a recent Mainland Affairs Council survey. Given a free choice, 72 percent would vote for independence.
Second, because these statements and policies are not in harmony with what the Taiwanese public wants, they are not sustainable. To enforce such policies, the government will need to employ an unacceptable degree of political engineering to overcome resistance, which will lead only to more division.
On the domestic front, there have also been several ridiculous statements by the KMT. KMT News recently hinted that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is a “kind of Taiwanese Nazi Party,” evidently comparing the achievements of a democratic party with the atrocities of Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler, despite the fact that the DPP has had no comparable policies and embraces all people living in Taiwan.
A KMT news story on July 19 identified independence sentiment and the DPP with corruption and war, with no mention of the KMT’s own long tradition of corruption, and despite the fact that the KMT’s unification drive is no guarantee of peace for Taiwan.
Again, the KMT is trying to create a fantasy world. The problem is that the propaganda is not only fallacious, but also generates an increased and unnecessary disharmony in Taiwan.
A sustainable future requires harmony between the national policies and wishes of the population in a democratic dialogue. It is crucial for Taiwan to avoid this kind of demonization and promotion of imagined worlds, and instead to develop mutual respect and reach a level of trust where public differences are realized and can be handled.
When the international community embraces the ECFA and related policies in ignorance of these tendencies toward disharmony, they risk supporting unsustainable development. Instead, support for Taiwan’s right to self-determination, as well as democratic and economic development, is needed to foster mutual understanding in Taiwan.
Michael Danielsen is the chairman of the Copenhagen-based Taiwan Corner.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS