The Nation’s presidential inaugurations, held on May 20 every four years since the first direct presidential election in 1996, should be a day of celebration, but it is not.
On Monday, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said that he sleeps well at night because he is improving the nation and Taiwanese. Ma is reminiscent of the incompetent emperor Hui (惠帝) of the Jin (晉) Dynasty.
In this era, most Taiwanese are depressed. In the face of the president’s extremely low approval ratings, Ma would have resigned long ago if he had any sense of shame, but he really cannot see his own shortcomings.
Former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) was inaugurated as the first directly elected president on May 20, 1996.
In 1994, Ma was one of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) officials who opposed direct presidential elections during a constitutional amendment.
At that time, Lee was the chairman of the KMT, and as an ethnic Taiwanese, some KMT members with their colonial Chinese ideology did not like Lee as their chairman, and they tried to restrain him. Then-premier Hau Pei-tsun (郝柏村) teamed up with former presidential adviser Lin Yang-kang (林洋港) to challenge Lee, the KMT’s candidate, in the 1996 presidential election. What a loyal KMT member Hau was.
On May 20, 2000, Democratice Progressive Party (DPP) candidate Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was elected president. The power transfer was the beginning of a new era and an opportunity for Taiwan’s democratic development and the world praised the transfer as a peaceful revolution.
After losing power, the KMT expelled Lee the following year.
When Chen was re-elected in 2004, it was a big blow to the KMT. Although the KMT had ruled Taiwan based on an anti-communist ideology for decades, it now changed its tune as top party officials fell over each other to visit China and join hands with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
On May 20, 2008, Ma succeeded Chen as president. Soon after the KMT regained power, Ma gave Chen a present by sending him to prison. It looked like Ma was making an example of Chen to warn others that the ROC belongs to China, and that there is no turning back from the KMT-CCP cooperation.
The so-called “1992 consensus,” a term former Mainland Affairs Council chairman Su Chi (蘇起) admitted making up in 2000, refers to a tacit understanding between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese government that both sides of the Strait acknowledge there is “one China,” with each side having its own interpretation of what “China” means.
In Ma’s version of the “1992 consensus,” when it comes to the cross-strait consensus on “one China, with each side having its own interpretation,” his interpretation is that “one China” refers to the PRC and that the ROC refers to “Chinese Taipei” or, even worse, “Taipei, China.”
In 2012, Ma was re-elected by playing the China card, but he lost the chance for the ROC to be reborn in Taiwan. As we are entering the eighth year of his presidency, the good times are about to end for him. The democratic foundation that was laid on May 20, 1996, has almost been hollowed out. Ma’s policies hang as a dark cloud over Chinese who followed the KMT to Taiwan in the hopes of starting a new life.
The nation must get rid of the Chinese colonial mindset, or we are doomed to continue taking one step forward and then one step back, never making progress. This is the problem that we must review on May 20.
In Taiwanese folk culture, people shout “cross the bridge, cross the bridge” to guide the dead across the Helpless Bridge (奈何橋) to the underworld. This is what we should have shouted after Ma on May 20.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Eddy Chang
A Chinese diplomat’s violent threat against Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi following her remarks on defending Taiwan marks a dangerous escalation in East Asian tensions, revealing Beijing’s growing intolerance for dissent and the fragility of regional diplomacy. Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday posted a chilling message on X: “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off,” in reference to Takaichi’s remark to Japanese lawmakers that an attack on Taiwan could threaten Japan’s survival. The post, which was later deleted, was not an isolated outburst. Xue has also amplified other incendiary messages, including one suggesting
Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday last week shared a news article on social media about Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks on Taiwan, adding that “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off.” The previous day in the Japanese House of Representatives, Takaichi said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute “a situation threatening Japan’s survival,” a reference to a legal legal term introduced in 2015 that allows the prime minister to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces. The violent nature of Xue’s comments is notable in that it came from a diplomat,
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
RSS