President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has been repeatedly endorsing Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential nominee Hung Hsiu-chu’s (洪秀柱) “one China, same interpretation” formula. He has even brought the phrase with him on his foreign travels, saying it falls within the scope of Ma’s longstanding mantra of “one China, with each side having their own interpretation.”
It is clear that Hung was able to glide through the primaries without a hitch because her biggest supporter is Ma.
There is a proverb in Chinese: “A husband and wife, like two birds that inhabit the same patch of forest, are momentary companions; when faced with difficulty, each flies their separate way.” In this sentence, are the words “same” and “each” identical in meaning? Not unless the proverb is appended with: “Eventually, both birds fly into the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) lair.” This shared final destination is, of course, the main reason Ma supports Hung.
For successive days, the Chinese-language Web site China Review News Agency, whose main financial backer is China’s Taiwan Affairs Office, has been voicing grievances on behalf of Hung, and political commentators have revealed that Chinese officials have held secret meetings with Hung’s inner circle. All this effort is aimed at achieving the same goal: unification with China.
No matter how you look at it, there is a world of difference between the terms “each side having their own interpretation” and “same interpretation.”
To use the wearing of pants as an analogy, currently Ma and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) are wearing different pants. Although the brand, “China,” is the same, their pants are a different style and length. However, Hung and Xi are wearing the same pair of pants: brand, style and size. Hung has forced herself into Xi’s capacious lower garment.
Since Hung’s “one China, same interpretation” formula has caused a backlash among the public — and even within the KMT’s conservative faction — both Ma and KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) have been trying to guide Hung back to their version of “one China.” Hung, with her blunt manner, needs to learn to employ Ma’s verbal sleight of hand, and temporarily refrain from using her “same interpretation” mantra.
During the Taipei mayoral election in 1998, Ma said: “I am a new Taiwanese who grew up eating Taiwanese rice and drinking Taiwanese water.”
Ahead of the 2008 presidential election, Ma again said: “Even if I were struck down and burnt to ashes, I would still be Taiwanese.”
However on becoming president, Ma’s prime task has been to sell Taiwan out to China.
Now, Hung is parroting a similar line, saying: “I eat Taiwanese rice, how can I not love Taiwan?” Hung, a female version of Ma, has shown her true colors.
Ma and Hung are cut from the same cloth: Both are obedient disciples of a one-party state education system. Hung is akin to a head lecturer, and Ma a professional student. This education system is still causing damage to Taiwan; producing either ferocious wolves like Hung or seemingly gentle pussycats like Ma as its leaders. Taiwan’s education system is in need of reform.
Last year’s Sunflower movement and this year’s campaign to stop the so-called “minor adjustments” to the high-school curriculum guidelines shows that young Taiwanese have a desire to change their future.
The curriculum can be seen as the soul of Taiwan’s education system. By attempting to ram through “minor adjustments” to the curriculum guidelines, Ma has lobbed a grenade into the political arena before stepping down from office. This is why Hung has been shouting herself hoarse, saying the changes to the curriculum do not go far enough.
Hung also keeps talking about the battle for historical interpretation between the Republic of China (ROC) and those advocating Taiwanese independence. Lest it should be forgotten, the historical perspectives of the ROC and the CCP only differ in the slightest degree. For the most part, however, both sides share the same interpretation of Chinese history. From the Opium Wars up until Sun Yat-sen’s (孫逸仙) military unification of China, both the KMT and CCP have worn the same pair of pants.
Since the opening-up of China, both Ma and Hung have ignored China’s reactionary politics, instead rushing headlong toward China’s enveloping economy to achieve their goal of political unification.
Paul Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Edward Jones
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US