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.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS