A US-based high-ranking official who served under the administration of former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) used to offer a standard response to any overseas Taiwanese who wanted Taiwan to be annexed by China. He would say, — and not without a degree of satisfaction — that advocates of this position should first move back to Taiwan and then see how they felt about the issue.
This strikes at the very heart of what democracy is. Any changes to the sovereign status, political system or way of life in Taiwan should be decided by Taiwanese. People living overseas, on the other side of the world, should keep their opinions to themselves if they’re not prepared to live with the consequences.
This principle can also be applied to Taiwanese businesspeople in China: The question is whether Straits Exchange Foundation Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) has the guts to tell these pro-unification businesspeople to put up or shut up — to go back and live in Taiwan before offering their opinion.
No one is claiming that all Taiwanese businesspeople in China are communist-leaning, but it cannot be denied that they are at the mercy of the machinations of Beijing and they end up looking at things from a Chinese perspective. Advocates of annexation, whichwould spell the death of Taiwanese democracy, are the people who form President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) hardcore base of supporters.
Ma does not stand up for Taiwan. He wouldn’t even deign to stand up for the Republic of China (ROC). His “one China” policy has undermined his popularity and voter support, just as it has damaged the sovereignty, industry and employment prospects of Taiwan and the democratic rights of Taiwanese.
The Hong Kong edition of China Taiwan Businessman magazine has been running a “Save Ma” campaign, lauding his policy of capitulating to China, mainly because it’s in the economic interests of Taiwanese businesspeople in China that he does so.
The “Save Ma” slogan reflects the concerns of China and the pro-China faction in the aftermath of last month’s special municipality elections. Immediately after the elections, Li Jiaquan (李家泉), a Chinese pundit and former official dealing with Taiwanese affairs, conceded that Ma was “flawed,” but called on the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to unite around him, offer their support and stop undermining him.
Li is making a play on words in Chinese here. The phrase he uses for support includes the character tai — houtai (support, 後台) — which is the same tai as the first character in the name Taiwan. What he was insinuating was that he sees Ma as dismantling the ROC and undermining Taiwan (chaitai, 拆台) in readiness for surrendering it to China. Ma knows that even hardcore, pan-blue supporters would balk at this and his prospects for re-election for a second term would not be good. The answer is to support him (butai, 補台), in other words, by being complicit in his deceiving of the electorate.
Ma has recently made much of the ROC’s centenary, regurgitating that oft-repeated phrase about “loving Taiwan” and that the future of the country is to be decided by the 23 million Taiwanese living here. This is little more than deception; nothing more than cloak and dagger.
Support Ma or undermine him. Save Ma or save Taiwan. This is the predicament currently facing the KMT. It is also a crucial choice that the Taiwanese electorate faces with the legislative elections at the end of this year or the presidential election next year.
James Wang is a media commentator.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
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