Has President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) been confirmed to have some kind of psychosis? No. Then the only alternative is to conclude that his delusional ramblings have some actual purpose.
The latest evidence of this was a slip of the tongue when he used the term “one country, two systems” when talking about the “one China” principle in his Nov. 7 meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), as well as him referring to the meeting as “another form of peace agreement.”
He did not misspeak. This was not the verbal equivalent of a typo. He is a believer in “one China” and he is very good at making things up.
Former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) came up with the idea of “one country, two systems.” Nobody is disputing that there are two systems, it is just that Taiwanese do not accept the bit about “one country.”
However, Ma has confirmed the so-called “1992 consensus,” and accepted the idea of “one China,” thereby substantiating “one China, two systems.”
Nevertheless, he is still attempting to change his presentation of the meeting with Xi from one of “building bridges” to “another form of peace agreement.”
His persistent touting of his own success in “bridge-building” is strongly reminiscent of former US president Richard Nixon’s harping about his “ice-breaking” visit to China in 1972. That was when Nixon got down on one knee and accepted China’s conditions.
Ma’s meeting with Xi bears strong resemblance to the time former US president Franklin Roosevelt had Patrick Hurley, his personal envoy to former Republic of China (ROC) president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), accompany former Chinese leader Mao Zedong (毛澤東) to Chongqing in 1945 for a meeting with Chiang, fearful that Chiang would throttle Mao.
Ever since he took power in 2008, hoping to intimidate ordinary Taiwanese and to embellish his own achievements, Ma has been repeating over and over, like a senile old man, how he has transformed the Taiwan Strait into a peaceful highway from the “killing fields” of the past.
Yes, he used the Chinese phrase used as the translation of the title of the movie The Killing Fields, which depicted the locations in Cambodia where hundreds of thousands were slaughtered and left to rot by the Khmer Rouge. The Khmer Rouge had taken a leaf out of Mao’s playbook on how to “recreate” and cleanse society.
Yes, the Taiwan Strait has seen opposition and tensions over the years, but what is this talk of it being like the killing fields? The two artillery bombardments of Kinmen do not really count, as they were technically not across the Taiwan Strait, but rather in what was incontrovertibly Chinese territory.
That Taiwan has a democracy and that there is no war across the Taiwan Strait are thanks to the diplomatic intervention and military power of the US, which had nothing to do with Ma allowing Taiwan to be “peacefully annexed.”
Ma only knows how to fabricate or exaggerate the seriousness of past events or situations and inflate his own achievements, while trying to conceal the price that has to be paid.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS