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
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