Taiwan has had a locally elected government for two decades now, and its democracy has gone from strength to strength. We all thought that the days of politicians accusing outsiders of interfering in internal politics had been consigned to history some time ago. That is, until a spokesman for President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) — in response to suspicions raised by 34 academics and writers from the US, Canada, Australia and other countries about the timing of a probe into more than 30,000 documents that allegedly went missing three years ago under the former Democratic Progressive Party administration — called it “reckless interference.” This is the kind of language one would expect from China.
Accusations of “reckless interference” from outsiders is part of the lexicon of dictators the world over. During the martial law period under Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), suppressing democracy and depriving people of their rights were called “governing according to the law.” Questions by other countries about the appropriateness of government suppression, arrests and courts martial, along with calls for an end to martial law, were met with accusations of “reckless interference.”
People overseas are similarly concerned about human rights in China, expressing empathy for the victims of the Tiananmen Square Massacre, supporting Tibetan independence, objecting to China’s suppression of “Charter 08,” awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to jailed writer Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波) and, more recently, protesting the arrest of the artist Ai Weiwei (艾未未). In each of these cases, Beijing’s standard response is foreigners “don’t understand the situation,” or are “recklessly interfering” with “the rule of law” in China.
The Ma administration has apparently stooped to using the language of the Chinese communists and Chiang Kai-shek, showing just how far democracy, human rights, justice and fairness have receded in Taiwan over the past three years. For the government to accuse individuals from other countries, who have shown themselves to be longstanding friends of Taiwan and its democracy, of not understanding the situation and of “reckless interference,” is more ridiculous and reprehensible than Beijing’s behavior. Taiwan depends on international concern and support for its security and independence.
Chiang and his son, Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), had the support of the US Republican Party for their anti-communist stand, while accusing the Democrats of “reckless interference” in internal affairs. Former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) had the support of both the Democrats and Republicans for their efforts in establishing and developing democracy in Taiwan and for standing up against the communists, and therefore had no call to accuse anyone of interference as an excuse to neglect their responsibilities.
The Ma administration has tossed aside the gains Taiwan has made — which secured US support for its democratic and anti-communist policies — and rudely dismissed comments made by the nation’s longstanding friends. The result is that Republican support has dissipated and the Democrats have lost hope for Taiwan, leading to a number of US academics, who have placed their hopes in China, and several former US officials, in the name of US interests, advocating sacrificing Taiwan as a way to improve ties with China.
Making enemies of the allies of Taiwanese democracy and human rights under the twin banner of “rule of law” and “governing in accordance with the law” just reveals the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) for what it is: an anti-democratic organization willing to sacrifice Taiwan and collude with the Chinese communists.
James Wang is a political commentator.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
The White House’s decision to take a 9.9 percent stake in Intel Corp is looking like very shrewd business indeed. Since the government bought in at US$20.47 a share last August, the US chipmaker’s surging stock price has delivered the US a US$43 billion return. One of the reasons the investment has so far proved so sound is that the White House has made sure of it. According to The Wall Street Journal, Howard personally pushed deals on Intel’s behalf with some of the most lucrative clients imaginable. They include Nvidia Corp, the company at the heart of the AI
A single photograph can cut through a lot of noise, but it can also be used to misrepresent the truth. At the very least, it can concentrate the mind on something that requires further investigation. On Monday last week, Ma Ying-jeou Foundation CEO Tai Hsia-ling (戴遐齡) and former National Security Council secretary-general King Pu-tsung (金溥聰) held a news conference in which they showed a photograph of former foundation CEO Hsiao Hsu-tsen (蕭旭岑), now Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) deputy chairman. In the image Hsiao is seated next to Xiamen Taiwan Businessmen Association chairman Han Ying-huan (韓螢煥). The two men were holding
I first met Professor Ray Jiing (井迎瑞) as a film and documentary student at Shih Hsin University’s (SHU) Department of Radio Television and Film in 1988. The following year, he went on to become the director of the Chinese Taipei Film Archive — forerunner of the Taiwan Film and Audiovisual Institute (TFAI). Over his eight-year tenure, Jiing rescued and restored over 200 classic Taiwanese films. In 1997, he established the Graduate Institute of Studies in Documentary and Film Archiving at Tainan National University of the Arts (TNNUA), and I joined the program in his third cohort of students. Beyond a
President William Lai Ching-te’s (賴清德) May 20 second-anniversary address was not just a routine policy review; it was damage control. US President Donald Trump’s remarks — that he did not want to see anyone move toward independence and that the delivery of a major Taiwan arms package could depend on the progress of US-China relations — unsettled Taiwan’s public and created an opening for opposition parties to question whether Taiwan was being treated as a bargaining chip in Washington’s dealings with Beijing. Lai’s speech was designed to close that opening. The address covered the expected ground: sovereignty, cross-strait relations, defense spending,