What is the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) vision for Taiwan? An answer to this question is warranted after the KMT agreed to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) under the “one China” framework.
The cocktail of policies over the past five years further accentuates the need for an answer because they seem to be no more than tactical initiatives. The vision that these initiatives are serving is not stated and thus left open to interpretation. Uncertainty about Taiwan’s future is not what Taiwan needs as China’s international influence is growing rapidly.
The KMT’s policies and the “one China” framework must lead the international community to conclude that the KMT government is consciously or unconsciously directing Taiwan toward a Hong Kong model or even toward China. If this is the official policy, then KMT should be honest and state it clearly.
The KMT’s Taiwan policies are embedded in policies such as the nonexistent “1992 consensus” and the policy of no independence, no unification and no use of force. The problem with these policies are that they are empty phrases stating nothing about the KMT’s vision for Taiwan. Moreover, policies based on negations about what you will not do will never lead a country forward.
The lack of a vision for Taiwan has generated a friendly relationship with China, which has been recognized worldwide. However, if increased international space for Taiwan was a desired goal of these friendly relationships, the KMT has failed miserably.
Taiwan’s observer status is subject to annual approval from China and the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement between Taiwan and China has not yet been sent to the WTO. Consequently, both achievements have lowered Taiwan’s international status.
The fundamental problem is that the KMT’s policies appear to mimic the policies of Hong Kong’s government. Hong Kong is fast becoming more Chinese and less uniquely Hong Kong. The consequence is that Taiwanese business has become an ally in the cross-strait policies and Taiwanese media has become increasingly influenced by Chinese agendas. Thus, China can influence Taiwan in many areas and its influence is growing.
However, Hong Kong’s development offers concrete lessons on how to resist China’s influence, and Taiwan’s politicians and civil society are already learning from Hong Kong. Civil society in Taiwan can play a significant role in resisting China’s policies. This requires that the otherwise inspiring demonstrations like the ones against media mergers and support for the Huaguang Community (華光社區) are elevated to questions about cross-strait policies and the future of Taiwan.
On the political level, politicians have to play a fine balance between resistance and cooperation with China. This requires bold leadership from the opposition parties and courage to safeguard the right for Taiwanese to determine their own future.
It is time for the Taiwanese to demand that their KMT government make a clear policy statement on its vision for Taiwan. The KMT is likely to fail on this.
It is interesting to observe that recently disclosed US files from March 1949 show that the CIA believed that the KMT “could not be relied upon to prevent the communists from gaining control of the island.”
Today, the files set the current cross-strait development and the KMT’s lack of a vision for Taiwan into historical perspective.
Michael Danielsen is the chairman of Taiwan Corner.
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
The restructuring of supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor industry, was an essential part of discussions last week between Taiwan and a US delegation led by US Undersecretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Keith Krach. It took precedent over the highly anticipated subject of bilateral trade partnerships, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) founder Morris Chang’s (張忠謀) appearance on Friday at a dinner hosted by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for Krach was a subtle indicator of this. Chang was in photographs posted by Tsai on Facebook after the dinner, but no details about their discussions were disclosed. With
Astride an ascended economy and military, with global influence nearing biblical proportions, Xi Jinping (習近平) — general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), chairman of the Central Military Commission and president of the People’s Republic of China — is faithfully heralded, in deeds and imagery, as a benevolent lord, determined to “build a community of common destiny for all mankind.” Rather than leading humanity to this Shangri-La through inspirational virtue a la Mahatma Gandhi or Abraham Lincoln, the CCP prefers a micromanagement doctrine of socialism with Chinese characteristics as the guiding light. A doctrine of Marxist orthodoxy transplanted under a canvas
On Sept. 8, at the high-profile Ketagalan security forum, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) urged countries to deal with the China challenge. She said: “It is time for like-minded countries, and democratic friends in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond, to discuss a framework to generate sustained and concerted efforts to maintain a strategic order that deters unilateral aggressive actions.” The “Taiwan model” to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic provides an alternative to China’s authoritarian way of handling it. Taiwan’s response to the health crisis has made it evident that countries across the world have much to learn from Taiwan’s best practices and if