President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) told a prayer breakfast meeting yesterday in New Taipei City (新北市) that he has heard the voice of the people and that there were many things the government needed to work on. Unfortunately, however, it looks as though the nation’s prayers will not be answered as a result of that breakfast meeting, because Ma’s remarks showed he still suffers from the hearing impairment that has plagued him for years — selective listening.
He only hears the sycophantic voices of those closest to him, not those further away who disagree with his policies, no matter how loud they shout.
The president did promise to redouble the government’s efforts to improve the economy, create more investments and exports and to ensure the poor get more. However, he said nothing about reining in his drive to bind the nation’s economy with that of China or addressing concerns raised by the closed-door negotiations with Beijing that have led to the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) or the services trade agreement.
How could he claim yesterday that he has heard the voice of the people when he obviously did not hear about the results of two polls, one conducted by Taiwan Indicators Survey Research (TISR), the other by cable news channel TVBS, which were released on Thursday?
The TISR poll found that 68.3 percent of respondents are very wary about the prospect of a cross-strait peace agreement and do not want negotiations for such a pact to begin before a national referendum is held to sanction such talks. Just about the same number (67.9 percent) said they were opposed to the idea that if a cross-strait peace pact were signed, unification with China should be recognized as a national goal.
The TVBS survey found that 71 percent of respondents support Taiwan’s independence from China if given the option of either backing independence or supporting unification. The poll also found that 64 percent supported maintaining the “status quo.”
Even Mainland Affairs Council spokeswoman Wu Mei-hung (吳美紅) said the TVBS results show that the government should move forward on its policy toward China based on mainstream public opinion.
The message that a majority of Taiwanese are not rushing as fast as the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to embrace the autocratic monolith on the other side of the Taiwan Strait came through loud and clear on Thursday — as it has been in poll after poll in recent years — and yet it is obvious that no one in Ma’s inner circle in the KMT, the Presidential Office or Ma himself, is paying the slightest attention.
Ma is continuing to urge quick passage of the service trade pact by the legislature — under the guise that it will help the economy — despite the criticism and protests from all levels of society against it. The complaints raised about the way that the pact was reached are exactly the same as those heard after the ECFA was inked, yet the administration did not change its course.
He continues to send government and KMT officials to cozy up to their Chinese counterparts — dispatching Mainland Affairs Council Minister Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) to the recent APEC forum in Bali and former KMT chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) to a forum with the Chinese Communist Party in Nanning, China, last weekend — where the dominant voice of such meetings comes from Beijing. Ma’s determination to open Taiwan up to China has been the hallmark of his presidency.
Ma can say he is listening to the public, but his actions belie his words. So it should come as no surprise then that so many Taiwanese no longer give any credence to what they hear from him.
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