Within two weeks, president-elect Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) visited both the Chungshan Institute of Science and Technology, a developer of advanced weapon systems, and the Aerospace Industrial Development Corporation, a developer of aerospace and defense products. She gave talks showing expertise during both visits. These visits demonstrate that this woman can safeguard national security.
Taiwan might have disputes of ownership over certain islands and reefs with Japan and Vietnam, but it has a greater dispute over national sovereignty with China, which is seeking to annex Taiwan, so these visits were clearly pointed.
Tsai can come off as a little cowardly. When being bullied by China to accept the “1992 consensus,” she expressed hopes Beijing would show “greater goodwill.” After hearing her appeal, Chinese officials in charge of Taiwanese affairs have made reckless remarks and continued their bullying. And of course, their Taiwanese supporters were quick to chime in.
So is Tsai cowardly or courageous? She usually does more and talks less. Even if she gave talks when visiting the defense industry, her remarks were not provocative or pointed. As for the bullying by China and President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), she responds in a mild manner and never fires back with emotion.
Tsai’s character is in line with the principle of “peace, rationality, non-violence and non-profanity.”
However, after following this principle for 20 years, Hong Kong’s freedom and rule of law have degenerated. Hong Kong’s use of “non-profanity” in principle might be a result of the British influence. Due to the gap between Western culture and traditional Chinese “ruffian culture,” the principle is having the opposite effect in Hong Kong.
Today, young people in Hong Kong are abandoning this principle for brave protests, and Beijing reacted forcefully. In particular, Hong Kong Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying (梁振英) made threatening gestures, trying to win Beijing’s trust and his own reappointment by further intensifying opposition. Beijing has now softened its stance on Hong Kong’s protests after some deep reflection.
On the contrary, by following this principle, Tsai is being bullied more by Chinese officials and their flunkies, who think she is weak. They are pressuring her to accept their way, because “bullying the weak and fearing the strong” has always been the nature of these Chinese hoodlums.
If Tsai accepts the “1992 consensus” in exchange for greater goodwill, those bullies would demand that she accept that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to “one China.” If you give them an inch they will take a mile, it is in the nature of bandits.
Beijing is softening its stance on the US, Japan and even Hong Kong, fearing war with the US and Japan. However, it is particularly hostile to Taiwan due to its misjudgment of Tsai’s approach.
The Democratic Progressive Party’s New Tide faction expelled former Straits Exchange Foundation chairman Hung Chi-chang (洪奇昌) for being a “follower” of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) former National Security Council secretary-general Su Chi (蘇起), which should show Beijing that behind Tsai’s gentle appearance is strength. Her “peace, rationality, non-violence and non-profanity” policy is likely to win greater sympathy in the international community and she is going to break the “one-China” curse sooner or later.
In terms of Tsai’s inaugural speech on May 20, she is likely to give an appropriate response to China’s bullying and show Taiwanese dignity, boosting public morale.
Paul Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Eddy Chang
In a Facebook post on Wednesday last week, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei City Councilor Hsu Chiao-hsin (徐巧芯) wrote: “The KMT must fall for Taiwan to improve.’ Allow me to ask the question again: Is this really true?” It matters not how many times Hsu asks the question, my answer will always be the same: “Yes, the KMT must be toppled for Taiwan to improve.” In the lengthy Facebook post, titled “What were those born in the 1980s guilty of?” Hsu harked back to the idealistic aspirations of the 2014 Sunflower movement before heaping opprobrium on the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP)
The scuffle between Chinese embassy staffers in Fiji and a Taiwanese diplomat at a Republic of China (ROC) Double Ten National Day celebration has turned into a public relations opportunity for the government, Beijing and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Although the incident occurred on Oct. 8, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) downplayed it, only for the story to be picked up by the foreign media, forcing the ministry to respond. The public and opposition parties asked why the government had failed to remonstrate more strongly in the first instance. It is still unclear whether the ministry missed a trick
US President Donald Trump and his Democratic rival, former US vice president Joe Biden, are holding their final debate tonight. In their foreign policy debate, China is sure to be a major issue of contention for the two candidates. Here are several questions the moderator should pose to the candidates: For both: In the first televised US presidential debates in 1960, then-Democratic candidate John F. Kennedy and his Republican counterpart, Richard Nixon, were asked whether the US should intervene if communist China attacked Taiwan’s outlying islands of Kinmen and Matsu. Kennedy said no, unless the main island of Taiwan was also attacked.
For most of us, the colorful, otherworldly marinescapes of coral reefs are as remote as the alien landscapes of the moon. We rarely, if ever, experience these underwater wonderlands for ourselves — we are, after all, air-breathing, terrestrial creatures mostly cocooned in cities. It is easy not to notice the perilous state they are in: We have lost 50 percent of coral reefs in the past 20 years and more than 90 percent are expected to die by 2050, a presentation at the Ocean Sciences Meeting in San Diego, California, earlier this year showed. As the oceans heat further and