If the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is elected Taiwan’s next president on Jan. 14, the nation would be politically zigzagging rather than choosing to continue the stable and peaceful development achieved under President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). At least that is the argument doing the rounds in the international community, and it displays a worrying lack of historical memory of even recent events in Taiwan.
A reality check reveals that the zigzagging started with Ma’s election victory in 2008 and his failure to live up to the expectations of Taiwanese.
Over the past almost four years, Ma has been a handy tool for China and the international community to keep the unification dream alive. Observers have been able to argue that Ma’s big election win in 2008 is evidence that Taiwanese support his China-leaning policies. By extension, Taiwanese must therefore support the “one China” policy of Europe and the US, which is part of the inevitable trend toward the unification of Taiwan and China. Nothing could be more wrong.
When set against growing awareness of a common Taiwanese identity originating from a variety of factors, such as the nation’s distinctive history and unique society, Ma’s policies are not part of an inevitable trend, but rather an obvious political outlier.
Ma considers Taiwan to be a region of China and himself president of Taiwan and China. If this view and his domestic policies represented a significant and robust political consensus in Taiwan, the most recent polls would not have him trailing Tsai in what has been an otherwise tight race.
The real historical trend has a far longer provenance. Former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) supported and encouraged, in their own fashions, the pursuit of a common and unique Taiwanese identity, independence and democratic development. This trend is substantiated by a wide range of opinion polls.
Over the past 16 years, the number of Taiwanese who identify themselves as Taiwanese has increased significantly — from 17.3 percent in 1992 to 54.2 percent in June. At the same time, identification with China has correspondingly dropped from 26.2 percent in 1992 to 4.1 percent in June. This is a trend that has continued since Ma became president. A recent survey showed that 74 percent of Taiwanese would prefer independence if given a free choice and that more than 81.7 percent reject China’s proposal of “one country, two systems.”
Ma is the one who represents a break with history. His policies have hurt Taiwan’s hard-won international status and thus constitute a serious setback for the nation.
One always has to be careful to not overestimate statistical outliers. Such outcomes are often created during unusual circumstances, such as the 2008 election. However, when such results do not herald a new trend, they are more often than not a blip on the radar that quickly disappears.
A DPP win next month would put Taiwan firmly back on a healthy and sustainable path both domestically and in terms of its relationship with China and the international community.
Michael Danielsen is the chairman of Taiwan Corner.
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
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
RSS