Under Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) rule, the government habitually and unrealistically equated focusing on China with focusing on globalization, hiding behind the sacred “1992 consensus.” Now that it is in opposition, the KMT is accusing the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government of being a troublemaker for refusing to be held hostage by China and by a policy that allows Beijing to do as it pleases, and for pragmatically trying to put an end to Taiwan’s diplomatic problems.
However, following the KMT’s defeats in 2014’s nine-in-one elections and this year’s presidential and legislative elections, most Taiwanese are clearly opposed to the KMT. Not only is there no longer a market for the deceitful “1992 consensus,” but an attempt to label the DPP as a troublemaker has also failed.
Why should the situation be different in the international community?
‘TROUBLEMAKER’
During an interview with Voice of America on June 22 and also during a speech on Saturday last week, American Institute in Taiwan Chairman Raymond Burghardt unambiguously said that in 1992, then-Straits Exchange Foundation chairman Koo Chen-fu (辜振甫) and then-Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits chairman Wang Daohan (汪道涵) did not mention a “1992 consensus” during their meeting. This is clearly a warning to the people clinging to the fabricated “1992 consensus.”
An article published in Newsweek Japan on June 7 by Project 2049 Institute research fellow Ian Easton said in no uncertain terms that the troublemaker in the Taiwan Strait is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), not President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文). Quite the slap in the face of the KMT, which is trying to stick that label on Tsai.
Furthermore, Panamanian and Paraguayan media have addressed Tsai as “the president of Taiwan” in their reports during her visit, and when European and US politicians talk about the nation, they talk about “Taiwan.”
When have they ever mentioned the detestable Republic of China (ROC) or “Chinese Taipei?”
SINCERITY
Instead, the KMT — which is on its last leg and whose politicians talk insincerely about being Taiwanese and loving Taiwan during elections in an attempt to win a few more votes — treats the word “Taiwan” as if it were toxic.
When Tsai signed a guest book in Panama on Sunday last week, writing “President of Taiwan (ROC),” the KMT legislative caucus criticized her of belittling the nation.
According to the KMT, they are not belittling Taiwan when they talk about “Chinese Taipei” and “Taipei economic and trade offices,” but the DPP is when it calls a spade a spade and says “Taiwan”?
What kind of skewed logic is that?
If it is anyone who does not fit in in Taiwan, it is those who have made the choice to live here and are unwilling to live in China and become proper, upright Chinese, but continue to sell out Taiwan or expect Taiwanese to become Chinese.
However, the message coming from Taiwanese public opinion and the nation’s international allies is loud and clear: Tsai is the president of Taiwan, the “1992 consensus” is a fabrication and it is the leader of China who is the troublemaker in the Taiwan Strait, not the leader of Taiwan.
How long will it be before the KMT understands this and stops dancing to China’s tune?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired associate professor at National Hsinchu University of Education.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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