At the opening ceremony of the Tokyo International Film Festival on Oct. 23, the head of the Chinese delegation, Jiang Ping (江平), adopted the swagger of a “communist bandit,” demanding that the Taiwanese delegation should have its title changed to “Chinese Taipei” or “Taiwan, China” and be merged with the Chinese delegation.
This was certainly not, as members of the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) have claimed, an isolated incident. Rather, it is the grave consequence of accepting the so-called “one China” principle. All China is doing is cashing the check that Ma’s Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) wrote.
Of course, Taiwanese condemn Jiang’s rudeness and China’s arrogance. All the more worthy of condemnation, though, is the Ma administration for its bungling incompetence in failing to insist that Taiwan’s sovereignty belongs to its people and instead accepting the “one China” principle that means Taiwan is a part of China. If this principle is accepted, it leaves no leeway for saying that the Republic of China (ROC) is a sovereign state, or that Taiwan is a sovereign state, or that the nation’s sovereignty lies with its people.
Nonetheless, even before the Tokyo film festival spat was over, bureaucrats from the Ma administration chimed in with an old lie that has become a joke after being repeated so many times in the past 60 years. As a Government Information Office (GIO) press release about the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) dispute put it: “The mainland remains within the constitutionally defined territory of the Republic of China. So, of course, we cannot voice any disagreement with the mainland authorities’ claim that the Diaoyutai Islands are China’s national territory.”
Put simply, this means that “one China” means the ROC. It really takes a convoluted mind and a great deal of nerve to say such things and keep a straight face. If it were true that the ROC was the one, genuine China and that its territory extends to all of China, then the government headed by Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) in Beijing would be a bogus one, or at best a local government. In that case, Frank Chen (陳志寬), director of the GIO’s Department of Motion Pictures, who headed the Taiwanese delegation to the Tokyo film festival, could have told Jiang Ping to change his delegation’s title to “Chinese mainland” and enter the ceremony directly behind the ROC delegation.
If the ROC is the real China, then when Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) came to Taiwan he should have been arrested as a “communist bandit” and locked up in Tucheng (土城) together with independence advocate, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). So why, in contrast, did we see Ma ordering ROC flags to be hidden away during Chen Yunlin’s visit and not complaining when the Chinese envoy addressed him as plain “you” instead of calling him President Ma?
Nowhere else in the world does anyone accept silly notions like “China is part of the ROC,” “China is part of Taiwan” or “the People’s Republic of China is part of the ROC.” As far as Taiwanese are concerned, the most important thing is to insist that Taiwan is not part of China.
No one understands the KMT’s lies better than the KMT itself. On Nov. 23, 1949, former Shanghai mayor Wu Kuo-chen (吳國楨), who had fled to Taiwan, confided to then-US consul-general in Taipei John MacDonald that Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) had written off China after Guangzhou fell to the communists and that Chiang’s most recent visit to Chongqing had been to preside over the China’s “burial service.”
That “burial service” took place six decades ago. Does Ma really think anyone still believes the old lies?
James Wang is a media commentator in Taipei.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS