The People’s Republic of China (PRC) is Taiwan’s neighbor. Despite the PRC’s close economic ties with Taiwan, politically it regards Taiwan as its territory and has done everything it can do impede Taiwan’s international relations. It is reluctant to give up annexing Taiwan through military means.
However, Taiwan’s ruling Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has never bothered to stage a protest. On the contrary, its pro-China stance is only getting stronger by the day. The KMT is even delighted by its ability to monopolize the relations between politicians and industry.
KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) recently led a group of politicians to China to conduct a party-to-party diplomatic activity. However, he failed to defend the dignity of Taiwan as a sovereign nation during this visit. Instead, he joined the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in reaffirming the historically nonexistent “1992 consensus,” and he even said that Taiwan and the PRC are both part of the same “one China,” ignoring Taiwanese public opinion and that Taiwan and China are two independent nations — neither holds jurisdiction over the other. His support for China’s absurd idea of eventual unification is disturbing.
After the KMT’s rout in last year’s nine-in-one elections, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who was then the KMT chairman, had to hastily resign his chairmanship. The KMT should painstakingly correct its mistakes, ardently lean toward Taiwanese mainstream public opinion and humbly listen to citizens’ voices.
However, the KMT does not resort to this approach, which would help it win back public support. Instead, it is using the KMT-CCP cross-strait forum to earn the approval of the CCP so that, with Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) patronage, it can show off to Taiwanese and justify its monopoly on the benefits of cross-strait economic exchanges.
When high-ranking Chinese officials used abusive rhetoric such as “recognition of the 1992 consensus,” “opposition to Taiwanese independence” and “acknowledgment that Taiwan and China are both part of one China,” Chu did not promptly defend Taiwan’s national integrity, but feebly used the “one China” framework to define the “1992 consensus,” reminiscent of former vice president Lien Chan’s (連戰) display of weakness when he visited China in 2005.
In contrast, when Tainan Mayor William Lai (賴清德) visited China in June last year, he showed a lot of courage by saying that Taiwanese independence is the consensus of the Taiwanese and by truthfully telling the Chinese how democracy is practiced in Taiwan. Surprisingly, with that, he won respect from the Chinese.
Chu failed to emulate him, and instead he played the role of someone surrendering and paying tribute for the whole world to see. No wonder global media called Chu the party leader who backs eventual unification.
Taiwan belongs to the Taiwanese and is not under the jurisdiction of any other country. If the KMT desires to survive in Taiwan, it has to acknowledge this “Taiwanese consensus.”
The Taiwan Association of University Professors wants to inform the KMT that if it stays stubbornly aloof from reality and continues to sabotage Taiwan’s national integrity and sovereignty, it will be disdained by Taiwanese.
We strongly condemn Chu and the KMT that he leads for propagating the absurd view that Taiwan and China are both part of “one China,” which serves only to demonstrate once again that the KMT is a foreign colonial party.