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.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then