The Nov. 7 meeting between President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) took many by surprise, owing to its suddenness. What did not surprise a soul was how it ended up being carried out entirely according to China’s wishes.
First of all, a reflection on differing perspectives. When looking at either the Ma-Xi meeting or cross-strait relations, one should take care to avoid over-use of the words “China” or “Chineseness.” This is not a deliberate anti-China stance or “China bashing” simply for the sake of it; rather it is a reaction to more than 100 years of conflict and autocratic rule that has caused Chineseness to become bogged down by the rigid and closed logic of Chinese national identity.
The military parade held in Beijing earlier this year and the related dispute between Taiwan and China over the interpretation of the Second Sino-Japanese War are just two examples of this mindset. In addition, not only has the concept of Chineseness lost its original flexibility, but China seems to have lost the ability to accommodate the diversity and pluralism it had when it burst onto the world stage in the 21st century. No wonder the South China Sea dispute revolves around the so-called “nine-dash line” and the passage of warships.
Similarly, the public should refrain from marveling at the Ma-Xi meeting as a defining historical moment between the leaders of the Republic of China (ROC) and the Chinese Communist Party, since Taiwanese long ago broke free from the cruel cocoon of the “Chinese family” and bravely forged a new identity based on dignity and democracy. If Mr Ma is feeling secretly pleased with himself over the new cocoon that he has spun — and cannot see the true value of Taiwanese democracy — then the place in the history books he has just been bequeathed is set to be swiftly erased.
In this context, phrases used by Ma such as “cross-strait cooperation” and “Chinese revival,” and Xi’s “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation,” perfectly illustrate the gap between the autocratic and the democratic directions the societies have branched off into. From the point of view of Taiwanese, even the Constitution — the ROC Constitution brought over from China — clearly stipulates that all ethnic groups within the ROC are equal; and subsequent amendments to the Constitution provide for a multicultural society. However, in China, Chinese culture and Chinese ethnicity have become synonymous with the oppression and assimilation of the country’s ethnic minorities.
A good way of looking at Chinese is to do so through the concept of “overlapping consensus,” as put forward by John Rawls in his book Political Liberalism, which perhaps has the potential to solve the problem of what constitutes Taiwanese or Chinese identities.
Perhaps the key is that civil society, which of course includes respect for human rights, is the underlying foundation of a democracy. The entire body politic must work toward its formation and continued stability. Without such a foundation, any so-called “consensus” is nothing more than the powerful forcing the powerless to bow down before them and obey their edicts. Mr Ma and Mr Xi both clearly understand this key point, which is why they chose to talk of “consolidating peace,” referred to politics only in terms of principles, hinted at the possibility that war could break out at any time, while uttering the threatening phrase that “blood is thicker than water” through their saccharine smiles and telling Taiwanese to make the “correct choice.”
A threat cloaked in smiles is to be expected from Beijing, but Ma’s statements to the media both before and after the meeting were decidedly un-presidential. Taiwan is a democracy and the title of president is not Ma’s personal property: It is his duty to protect it under the Constitution and he cannot dispense with the title as and when he pleases.
In addition, how can the president talk of the Constitution and putting Taiwan first while in the nation, yet when facing China suddenly retreat into the realms of the so-called “1992 consensus.” Who was it that also said that the Constitution, which forms part of Taiwan’s democracy, does not allow for actual independence? Did Britain not allow a referendum on Scotland’s independence and the Canadian government agree to autonomy for the province of Quebec? Taiwan is already a de facto sovereign and independent nation, it is just that the Constitution still calls the nation the “Republic of China.”
Mr Ma’s biggest problem is that he comes across as a garrulous supplicant by constantly making requests to Xi. However, the root of the problem — apart from Ma running around like a headless chicken and sounding like a broken record — is that his administration has capitulated to the international political frameworks set up by China.
Ma’s closed-shop slogan, “one China, with each side having its own interpretation,” lacks objectivity and does not resonate with the public. Apart from deceiving the electorate, Ma is consigning Taiwan to a bleak future, shrouded under a cloak of authoritarianism and suppression from Beijing.
Ma’s capitulation to China is a significant challenge for Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson and presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文). To win over the center ground, the DPP has in the last few days — with much fanfare — unveiled a merry-go-round of contradictory positions. Civic groups have suggested various ways by which a system of checks and balances could be applied to the Constitution. However, the DPP — over-cautious and indecisive — does not dare to use any of them.
According to the Constitution, the legislature has the authority to invite the president to give a “state of the nation” address. Surprisingly, the DPP has opposed such a measure and appears, for no reason at all, to have given up on implementing a system of checks and balances.
This has led observers to suspect the DPP has blocked the possibility of legislative oversight of the president, with an eye on a future Tsai administration. The three or four principles that Tsai has proposed must become concrete measures, otherwise they are meaningless.
The ability of the Legislative Yuan to request a “state of the nation” address; submit an information request; investigate or interrogate the government; request a budget and even pass an act to govern the executive powers of the president are all afforded by the Constitution.
Since the DPP is unwilling to use the system and does not dare take to the streets in protest, all that is left is for the nation’s largest political party to do is grumble during televised political debates.
Under the guise of China’s national interest, Beijing has issued a grim message to Taiwan. It is as yet unclear whether the trance-like DPP will decide to follow Ma into the valley of death. All the public — and civic groups — can do is continue to take matters into their own hands and organize resistance to the cloaked threats of Mr Ma and Mr Xi.
Yen Chueh-an is a professor of law at National Taiwan University and a managing supervisor at the nongovernmental organization Taiwan Democracy Watch.
Translated by Edward Jones
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.