From the general mood on Saturday, it was hard to imagine that the 100,000 people who protested in downtown Taipei were mobilizing against a policy that, as they interpret it, is a matter of life and death for themselves and — judging by the large number of babies and children — their descendants.
What with the laughter, gaudy costumes, soap bubbles, incessant picture-taking and lively songs, one would think one had chanced upon a festival of some sort, not a rally against an ill-understood form of energy that, in the wake of the nuclear incident at the Fukushima Dai-ichi power plant in Japan in March 2011, fuels people’s fears of the terrible consequences should a catastrophe occur at one of the nation’s three operational plants.
The same could be said about other, large protests held in recent months, such as those targeting the risks of monopolization of the nation’s media.
Festive mood notwithstanding, the issues that have catalyzed protesters are no laughing matter. If we factor in the several, smaller protests held over the past four years, it becomes clear that the general mood that has descended upon Taiwanese is far more somber.
Not a week passes nowadays without a public protest being held, with issues ranging from nuclear energy to laid-off workers, state-sanctioned land seizures to the risks of Chinese influence in the local media. The frequency of the protests alone is cause for worry, as it highlights a serious disconnect between the public and the government, and the latter’s inability, or unwillingness, to resolve the issues.
While the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has largely succeeded over the years in weathering large-scale protests organized by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and other parties in the pan-green camp, such as the “Fury” (火大) rally held earlier this year, other protests increasingly involve far more diverse groups of people and many more young people. Additionally, the new protesters have tended to dissociate themselves from the green camp, and on some issues, such as nuclear energy, many are (or were) Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) supporters.
Consequently, while DPP rallies, however large, constituted for the Ma administration a relatively cost-free expression of discontent in terms of their impact on local and national elections, the great majority of protesters tended to be elderly and from the green camp, the KMT cannot afford to ignore the potential ramifications of the new wave of protests, as failure to address those grievances can directly translate into lost votes for the blue camp.
“I voted for the KMT last year, but I’m not sure I’ll vote for them again if they continue to ignore my voice,” was a common refrain on Saturday.
In many ways, the new protesters are not only sending a strong message of anger at the Ma administration; they are also clearly articulating the issues that matter to them and which the DPP, if it ever wants to recapture the Presidential Office, must pay attention to — not by cynically exploiting those for political gain, but by seriously providing viable alternatives that will have a real impact on people’s livelihoods.
The birthday party-like atmosphere might not last for much longer. That young people, long accused of being lethargic and uninterested in political issues, are now mobilizing, launching sit-ins and, at times, risking arrest, is a sign of a growing malaise within Taiwanese society. The longer the Ma administration continues to ignore their voices, the darker will the mood become.
So far, Taiwanese have been uncannily peaceful, and almost unnaturally patient with government officials, in their protests. That could change.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic