President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) raised concerns when he said the idea of Taiwan and China functioning as separate governments within a “one China” framework could be up for discussion. The Presidential Office quickly clarified that what he meant was that the idea should be discussed on an academic level, not in cross-strait negotiations anytime soon. That did little to ameliorate the concerns of critics, and rightly so.
Ma’s statements, even as bland as they are, cause concern because he suffers from a credibility gap that no amount of platitudes or photo opportunities can bridge. It is a gap that keeps growing. To be fair, however, it is not a gap that is his alone; he shares it with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
His “separate governments in a ‘one China’ framework” comment raised hackles because of the dense fog that has surrounded cross-strait negotiations since Ma took office, with the accompanying lack of legislative oversight of the talks and the use of “semi-official” bodies to give his government credit when he wants it, and plausible denial when he needs it.
All those KMT-Chinese Communist Party (CCP) lovefests have not helped either, given the pronouncements that have emanated from them. Honorary chairmen and other KMT members appear to have forgotten that they live in a multi-party nation, not the one-party state they grew up in or the single-party China they apparently aspire to. There are clear indications that much of the cross-strait agenda is dictated by Beijing, with input from Taipei.
Ma wants to take credit for inspiring more academics to think about cross-strait issues, but the problem is he only appears interested in what Chinese academics or those in his own chorus line have to say. He has either turned a deaf ear to those who have queried any of his policies or — in the case of an open letter from 34 academics and other experts about the probe into “missing official documents” from former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) era — had his aides brush aside the concerns on the grounds that the signatories were foreigners who really did not (ie, could not) understand Taiwan-China relations or were interfering in Taiwan’s judicial affairs, thereby impinging upon its sovereignty.
It is the same credibility gap that made his posing in the cockpit of an upgraded Indigenous Defence Fighter (IDF) on Thursday look ridiculous. The revamping of the IDFs’ avionics and flight control systems cannot make up for the air force’s limited number of fighter jets and the overall reduced capabilities of the military — not when compared with the rapidly modernizing People’s Liberation Army.
The shameful lack of military readiness cannot be laid solely on Ma’s concessionary “make talk, not war” mindset, but the blame can and should be put squarely on the KMT’s shoulders. It was unwilling to vote for any major defense packages during the eight years Chen was in office, simply as part of its efforts to kill any legislation that might be seen as giving Chen’s administration an advantage, regardless of whether the nation needed it or not.
In poll after poll, a vast majority of Taiwanese have said no to Beijing’s “one country, two systems” principle in any way, shape or form. Despite China’s economic blandishments, they are satisfied with the “status quo.” And why not, when Beijing’s repressive government and the escalating number of ecological disasters make the vaunted “economic miracle” along China’s east coast look more like a Potomkin village with each passing year — and each successive anti-graft drive in the CCP.
That brings up the final plank in Ma’s credibility gap. Despite repeated pledges, he has been unable to reform the KMT or Taiwan’s “black gold” politics. His administration’s only real “success” in its anti-graft efforts has been the jailing of Chen — and the indictment of former president, and the KMT’s other archnemesis, Lee Teng-hui (李登輝).
Please mind the gaps.
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
In China, competition is fierce, and in many cases suppliers do not get paid on time. Rather than improving, the situation appears to be deteriorating. BYD Co, the world’s largest electric vehicle manufacturer by production volume, has gained notoriety for its harsh treatment of suppliers, raising concerns about the long-term sustainability. The case also highlights the decline of China’s business environment, and the growing risk of a cascading wave of corporate failures. BYD generally does not follow China’s Negotiable Instruments Law when settling payments with suppliers. Instead the company has created its own proprietary supply chain finance system called the “D-chain,” through which