Students seem more alert than their parents’ generation. They differ from older corrupt and power-hungry generations and maintain a rational analytical ability. On March 17, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, bullied by the party’s placing of party discipline before public opinion, decided that the cross-strait service trade agreement review procedure should skip the Internal Administration Committee and be referred directly to the legislative floor. While older generations could not decide how to deal with this unprecedented crisis, a group of students rapidly mobilized. Ignoring the impact on their studies, they occupied the legislative chamber and blocked the government’s attempt to sell Taiwan down the river. This is a matter of saving the nation, a just action that requires bravery and intelligence.
Why is it a matter of saving the nation?
First, without the Sunflower student movement the pact would have taken effect immediately. The pact might allow a small number of companies in the financial and service industries to fulfill their dreams and move into China, but this is no different from the big technology firms that moved to China a decade ago to “consolidate resources and improve competitiveness.” It will do nothing to facilitate innovation or upgrade industry, but will bring domestic unemployment and lower starting salaries. More seriously, the pact will allow Chinese businesses — the biggest of which are state- owned — to move in and buy up a hollowed-out Taiwan. Beijing would be buying Taiwan without firing a single bullet.
Second, the student movement has recaptured Taiwan’s democratic institutions. Why does President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) continue to insist that the pact must be passed? It is partly that he wants to pave the way for a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). More importantly, if the agreement is passed before June, the 2016 presidential election will be one-and-a-half years, away which will allow the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party to use the new rule allowing any company investing US$250,000 or more to apply for permission to send over two people to be in charge.
That would allow China to set up what could be called “underground political work stations” from which it could direct and monitor the political mobilization of Taiwanese conducting business with China and indoctrinate them with a pro-China stance. With Chinese forces entering Taiwan and Taiwanese homes, democracy would disappear in all but name.
Third, the students’ demand that the pact be rejected and that laws regulating the oversight of cross-strait agreements be completed during the current legislative session strikes at the heart of the matter. It is more reasonable than the older generations’ demand for a clause-by-clause review of the pact.
Why does the government oppose a law regulating the oversight of cross-strait agreements? Although Ma is inept at ruling the country, he has been very effective when it comes to cross-strait relations — in little more than five years, his government has signed 19 agreements with China. He claims that cross-strait agreements are not state-to-state in nature. This loophole allows him to dodge legislative oversight. If the pact is forced through the legislature, the KMT could also see through a traitorous “peace accord” and put an end to Taiwan’s existence as a country.
The students have shown great bravery in standing up to the authorities. The older generation should take pride in the students: They are the glory of Taiwan, and its future.
Huang Tien-lin is former president and chairman of First Commercial Bank and a former national policy adviser to the president.
Translated by Perry Svensson
The news from General Christopher C. LaNeve, Vice Chief of Staff of the US Army, last month was a low-key 46 pages, but one sentence was arresting: the US Army will “organize, train, and equip against the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) — the ‘pacing threat’ — with the same institutional focus that the Cold War generations brought to the Soviet Army.” Ouch! The sentence was in an unclassified document entitled “How The Army Fights,” and billed as “Operational Warfighting Guidance” for the Army; it is comprehensive and “multi-domain”; it covers the globe. Despite its breadth, there was no mistaking its focus
Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator and Taipei mayoral candidate Puma Shen (沈伯洋) on Saturday faced each other in their first televised debate. The candidates debated food safety, urban renewal, child protection, public safety and traffic improvement. Prior to the debate, Chiang had been criticized for equivocating and sidestepping questions from reporters and city councilors, by giving nonanswers or tasking his aides or city officials to answer for him. He has also been criticized for repeating talking points and avoiding interviews. After Shen’s campaign gained momentum and the legislator’s support
There are a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) politicians who still seem to be at a loss as to why the more noise they make about unification and being “one family” across the Taiwan Strait, the harder it is to gain the support of young voters. Perhaps they believe that these professions of affinity for China tap into historical sentiment and demonstrate sincerity in seeking cross-strait peace. However, they fail to see the shifts that have taken place in Taiwanese society through democratization and generational changes. Their rhetoric is not only failing to bring the two sides of the
In preparing to cast their ballots today, most Americans have not been leafing through foreign policy white papers. Rather, they have been thinking about their fuel costs, the price of groceries, rent and medical bills. The foreign policy decisions that seem far removed from domestic issues ultimately come back to affect voters in the form of rising costs at home. That is precisely what is important for Taiwan about the US midterms. It is not that voters do not care about Iran, Ukraine, Israel or US President Donald Trump’s tariffs, but what matters most to ordinary Americans are those cost of