Undeterred by the waves of protests against his pet pact, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) remains resolute about pushing the controversial cross-strait service trade pact through the legislature, reaffirming on Wednesday his determination that the pact must pass the legislature by June and that the Executive Yuan must ratify it by then.
As a national leader with an embarrassing 9 percent approval rating, Ma nonetheless finds the confidence within to go against mainstream public opinion, such as that depicted in a recent poll by Taiwan Indicator Survey Research that found 73.7 percent of respondents supported a line-by-line review of the proposed pact.
In the most serious challenge to Ma’s China policy so far, a group of protesters, mostly students, have occupied the Legislative Yuan since Tuesday evening, demonstrating against Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers for what protesters say is reneging on a promise to conduct a clause-by-clause review of the contentious pact.
The students, in a tense standoff with police, yesterday issued an ultimatum, threatening “further action” if Ma does not respond to their demands by noon today.
However, at press time last night, Ma remained unresponsive to the students’ call.
Ma often touts democracy as the nation’s greatest achievement. He has repeatedly trumpeted himself as the defender of the Constitution and lectured officials on respecting and implementing constitutional governance. However, how is it democratic and respectful to the Constitution and the rule of law when he is seemingly transforming democracy into dictatorship by breaching the principle of the separation of powers through threats to legislators, such as demanding that KMT caucus whip Lin Hung-chih (林鴻池) must have the pact clear the legislative floor?
Ma’s action is a clear case of executive power encroaching on legislative power.
If Ma is wise, however, he would, in a timely fashion, take the students’ call as an invitation and meet with them to hear their concerns. By doing so, he would not only demonstrate a level of class befitting a president, but also set a good example while living up to his self-anointed title of the “people’s president” (全民總統), one who opens his ears and listens to Taiwanese.
During the Wild Lilies (野百合學運) student movement in 1991, then-premier Lee Huan (李煥) visited with students and then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) also met the student representatives to hear their concerns.
Until as recently as last week, Ma, who doubles as KMT chairman, was urging his Cabinet ministers to go on political talk shows to promote the government’s report card, which he said has a lot of good policies that are not well-known to the public.
If he believes what he preaches, a great opportunity for the president to conduct a genuine dialogue with the students has arrived. However, Ma chose to completely ignore the students’ call.
Given how he once responded so swiftly to media reports that a long-time female supporter had lost her admiration for him that he flew to Hualien to pay her a special visit, resulting in her saying the president was back on her list of idols, Ma’s lack of of response to the students’ appeal is disturbing. It once again confirms underlying suspicions that the president has selective hearing — that he hears Beijing’s impatient drumbeat for the passage of the pact, but not the voices, concerns and worries of Taiwanese.
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