President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), acting in his capacity as Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman, said that Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) obstructionism is “the biggest crisis that Taiwan’s democracy faces.”
Speaking at the KMT’s 19th National Congress in Chiayi City on Sunday, Ma criticized the DPP over its boycotts of many bills and cross-strait agreements in the Legislative Yuan, citing an “attitude of extreme conceit bent on excluding outsiders, humiliating officials and playing games with specific bills.”
However, looking back at his attitudes toward democracy, it becomes obvious that he — as well as China — presents the biggest crisis for the nation’s democracy.
It is certainly inappropriate for a president in a democracy to say that democratic opposition is “the biggest crisis” for democracy.
In fact, history shows that Ma himself long opposed the nation’s democratization.
Many pro-democracy Taiwanese students studying in the US in the 1970s have said that Ma, who was also studying there at the time, frequently appeared at pro-democracy and anti-KMT rallies to take pictures. Ma never explained what he was doing, but most of the pro-democracy students suspected that he was spying for the KMT government.
In the 1990s, local democracy and human rights advocates campaigned to abolish Article 100 of the Criminal Code, which allowed the government to persecute people “with the intention” to change the Constitution or overthrow the government.
Serving as Mainland Affairs Council deputy minister at the time, Ma strongly resisted abolishing the clause.
Although Ma himself ran in the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections, Ma long opposed the direct election of the president, favoring an indirect election through the National Assembly, saying that also constituted a “direct election,” because voters would authorize the National Assembly to vote on their behalf.
In the 2000s, during a heated debate on whether government-initiated referendums should be held, Ma again voiced opposition to it, comparing the mechanism of direct democracy to the Chinese Cultural Revolution that Mao Zedong (毛澤東) mobilized from 1966 to 1977.
Despite being twice elected as president, Ma still does not seem to believe in democracy; evaluations of the nation’s freedom of press, as well as several other human rights indices, have continually dropped during his administration, and he tried several times to force through controversial bills or cross-strait agreements in the legislature, threatening to penalize KMT lawmakers who disagreed with him.
Ma has also repeatedly defended and praised past authoritarian leaders, notably former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), saying that they had done more good than harm to the nation.
In addition to Ma, “the biggest crisis” for Taiwan’s democracy is China.
Taiwan has never been ruled — not even for one day — by the People’s Republic of China, yet China never ceases to claim that Taiwan is a “breakaway province;” while intimidating Taiwan with its military, it penetrates society with its dominant economic power.
China’s threat to take over Taiwan, and its strategy of controlling Taiwanese politics and compromising the freedom of speech in Taiwan through economic means, have clearly become the biggest crisis for Taiwan’s democracy.
It is ironic for a politician who has opposed the development of democracy for so long, repeatedly showed support for authoritarian leaders and promoted closer ties with China, despite its threats, to accuse the DPP of presenting the biggest crisis for Taiwan’s democracy.
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman for maritime affairs Rogelio Villanueva on Monday said that Manila’s claims in the South China Sea are backed by international law. Villanueva was responding to a social media post by the Chinese embassy alleging that a former Philippine ambassador in 1990 had written a letter to a German radio operator stating that the Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島) did not fall within Manila’s territory. “Sovereignty is not merely claimed, it is exercised,” Villanueva said. The Philippines won a landmark case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 that found China’s sweeping claim of sovereignty in
RSS