Taiwan’s democratic development and its self-determination are challenged not only by President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), but also by the policies of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Unfortunately, there seems to be a strong focus on Ma’s low popularity and his competence as a president, rather than on the KMT as a party.
The KMT deserves more attention. Just because the KMT has been on the wrong side of democracy in the past and has enforced a Chinese mentality on the Taiwanese while dreaming of unification, it does not mean that the party is now handling these issues better. Indeed, it now seems to be finding new ways to achieve old agendas.
A reality check is advisable in this respect. Despite the fact that the KMT has a vast parliamentary majority, Taiwan’s democratic development has been held back over the past five years. Taiwan’s press freedom has deteriorated, as documented by the US-based Freedom House, and questionable legal cases have been filed against former government officials. Moreover, Ma’s involvement in attempts to unseat Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) constitutes a fundamental breach of the basic principles of the separation of power and checks and balances in a democracy.
The country even went as far as unjustly refusing entry to a German citizen in March — a decision which appears to have been politically motivated. His ban has been lifted. Given the background of this case and the fact that more Europeans are being banned from Taiwan, it is worrying that the KMT is reluctant to implement the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) that Ma has signed and which protects foreigners’ political activities in Taiwan.
Moreover, during the past five years, the KMT parliamentary majority has led to a lowering of Taiwan’s international status. This has threatened Taiwan’s self-determination.
The Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement agreement has still not been submitted to the WTO and the nation’s symbolic participation in the WHO is dependent on China’s annual approval. Both of these factors have lowered Taiwan’s international status.
Additionally, the KMT has not reacted when Ma has said that China is not a foreign country and that cross-strait relations are not international relations. Chinese culture is undeniable a part of Taiwan, but the KMT government overemphasizes it. By doing this, Europe’s Taipei Representative Offices miss the opportunity to brand Taiwan’s culture as unique and to portray Taiwan as a modern society.
This is not only hurting Taiwan’s self-determination by diminishing Taiwan uniqueness; it may also harm Taiwanese industries.
Also, in Taiwan Chinese culture is increasingly promoted in the educational system, which may serve the old goal of unification.
The most dangerous people for the KMT are those who point out how the party’s policies damage Taiwan’s democratic development and challenge its myth of unification. These people are directly undermining the party’s belief in what the right path for the nation is. It is encouraging to observe that the number of Taiwanese concerned about the nation’s current development is growing.
It continues to be a mystery why unification and Chinese national identity are so highly valued among KMT politicians, when it should be obvious that related policies hurt Taiwan’s future and international status — and go against the general public trend which sees the population increasingly disassociating themselves from China.
Why is the KMT walking along these similar avenues, and where is the KMT taking Taiwan? Ma is obviously not the only problem.
Michael Danielsen is chairman of Taiwan Corner, an online Danish publication.
In an article published on Tuesday in The Atlantic, titled “Will Taiwan Just Give Up?”, journalist Simon Shuster emphasizes the unpredictability of the US as an ally under US President Donald Trump and cites diminishing faith in the US as a contributor to what he sees as waning determination to resist China. As the title suggests, Shuster views a deal between Taiwan and China as an increasingly inevitable alternative to a costly war — one that Taiwan, lacking reliable allies and military capabilities, would eventually be destined to lose. He focuses on Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) — her
Taiwan’s domestic political situation is following recognizable political rhythms, while the international environment surrounding Taiwan is undergoing a major transformation. Within Taiwan, there are ongoing battles between the legislative and executive branches over the budget, and between cities and the central government over resources. Tensions between political parties dominate headlines and consume much of the attention of party leaders. Jockeying is underway for local elections this November and national elections in 2028. And the longstanding philosophical debate inside Taiwan over how best to protect Taiwan and promote the good life remains unresolved. Amidst all of this, Taiwan continues to function well. It
For more than a decade, Beijing has described its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as a benign program of ports, railways, factories and digital connectivity. That description was never true. The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has begun to stage military power behind the commercial geography it has constructed — and its recent air exercise in Egypt is the clearest warning yet. Last month, a Chinese flight of J-16 strike fighters, Y-9LG electronic warfare aircraft, KJ-500 AWACS aircraft, Y-20 transport aircraft, Z-20 utility helicopters and YY-20A in-flight refueling aircraft flew approximately 6,000km to Egypt for the “Eagles of Civilization” exercise with
Taiwan does not need a CIA deputy director to explain that Beijing treats commerce as a battlefield. It has been living that lesson for decades, watching its chip designers get poached, its retired officers get recruited for cash, and its companies get pressured to choose between the Chinese market and their own government’s security priorities. What changed this month is that Washington finally said the quiet part out loud. CIA Deputy Director Michael Ellis told a Washington audience that China’s threat to the US is now “fundamentally different,” because the competition is economic, not military, and that a Chinese company cannot
RSS