Wu’s myopic outlook
Former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) fawns over China because he has President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) “Chinamentia” disease, a kind of myopia that compels a person to see power and dictatorship as shiny bright treasures, and blots out the evil in tyranny and oppression. It is a kind of national blindness.
Wu cannot be forgiven for his failure to understand what it means to be a nation, and for his racist view that all Taiwanese are “Chinese.” This immature understanding of the Constitution, the democratic Taiwan and the rights bestowed on Republic of China citizens shows the KMT’s weakness when it comes to governing of the people, by the people and for the people.
Wu told Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party General Secretary Xi Jinping (習近平) that both sides of the Taiwan Strait should “promote nationalistic recognition because we cannot choose our ancestors.”
Wu said he is Taiwanese Hakka by blood, but also Chinese by race, which was meant to prove that Taiwan must be part of “one China” based on “race.”
There are almost 50 million Chinese-___ (fill in the blank), all citizens of other countries and many of whom would find Wu’s approach rather alarming. Just because they are of Chinese heritage does not make them citizens of the People’s Republic of China, nor does it make their nations China’s territories.
There are hundreds of millions of immigrants around the world who are second, third and fourth-generation “insert-a-nation.” In the US, they are Americans. In Taiwan, they are Taiwanese. It is a process of assimilation. Wu and Ma have not assimilated into Taiwan’s society, nor, apparently do they wish to.
Wu insults every indigenous Taiwanese; every person who emigrated to Taiwan from another place to make Taiwan his or her home; many millions of Chinese-Taiwanese born in Taiwan who acknowledge their Chinese ancestry, but consider themselves Taiwanese; and so many who were born in China and over the past five decades have accepted their new home and nationality in Taiwan.
I suspect these concepts are totally foreign to Wu and Ma. Every time this administration talks of “one China,” it is hurling insults at Taiwanese. It is an honor to be Taiwanese, so why is it that Ma and Wu seem so uncomfortable in their Taiwanese skins?
Lee Long-hwa
New York
Is Hsu daydreaming?
Former Democratic Progressive Party chairman Hsu Hsin-liang (許信良) has suggested that Taiwan should accept a “one China” principle modeled on the EU’s structure. Hsu says the EU in many ways acts as one country, with a structure that does not interfere with the sovereignty of member nations.
The second article of the Treaty on European Union mentions the values on which the EU was formed: respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights. It also says member states should be societies “in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.”
The EU is meant to be a union of stable democracies under the rule of law. Thinking that Taiwan could create a similar union with the Chinese Communist Party regime is either an act of ignorance, daydreaming or simply intentional parroting of Beijing’s thoughts.
Yes, Beijing would agree to a bold “one China” principle and on paper it may look like the EU model. However, in reality, any such move should remind us of another historical “cooperation” — the Warsaw Pact — the union of slaves states under Soviet hegemony.
Hanna Shen
Taipei
The US and liberty
Two toddlers play in an open yard, running on its green grass like young hares excited by spring. I was 20, composing photographic literature for a college class. I stood still in front of a low fence, separating their haven and the pavement, and pressed the shoot button on my Nikon F-60-d. A young mom who was sitting, until now unnoticed on the side of a porch, jumped to her feet and huddled her hares toward their house. She loudly protested: “Don’t. You can’t do that on my lawn. What are you doing?” Panic.
“I can shoot photos on a public street,” was my smartass reply. “I’m studying right there,” I pointed toward my campus three blocks away and the mom settled down quickly in the face of the non-threat.
“After the attack, we don’t know what will come next; need to be careful,” she said.
This has become typical across the US. Deep inside, we fear losing a core American value, which might never return: Freedom. It is the only legacy that matters from our Constitution. Our Founding Fathers drafted this simple idea so that we would not bow to any authority or tyranny.
We have been surrendering freedoms to the government, expecting it to take care of us in the name of fighting something. It used to be terrorism, then it was online piracy, then they tapped our e-mails.
We have become a frightened loser, always fearing new consequences. We overreact to defend ourselves. We allow our representatives to draft the Stop Online Piracy Act.
Edward Snowden and the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks provide us with a chance to think again, a blessing in disguise. We did some wrongs. We let our elected officials repeatedly embarrass our constitutional framework. We not only knocked on the door of tyranny, but begged for it. We had time to panic. Now we must arm ourselves with liberty, as free individuals.
Billy Fan
Chicago, Illinois
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs