When, after their weekend visit to Beijing, six Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and two independent local government heads suggested that Chinese tourists who want to tour Taiwan just visit the areas that they administer, since they support the so-called “1992 consensus,” other Taiwanese saw the clear hand of China’s bullying.
KMT hardliners no doubt attribute the drastic drop in the number of Chinese tourists to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government, but the KMT could hurt its legitimacy in the eyes of the general public by siding with Beijing.
Members of Taiwan’s Paralympics team on Tuesday complained about being pressured by China into changing the badge on their uniforms because it depicted the “national emblem,” while yesterday it was revealed that Taiwanese officials were expelled from a meeting of the UN Food and Agriculture Organization’s Committee on Fisheries in July under pressure from China.
China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS) Chairman Chen Deming (陳德銘), in an interview with Singapore’s Chinese-language Lianhe Zaobao reiterated Beijing’s stance that without the “1992 consensus” that encompasses the idea of “one China,” Taiwan would have no recourse in cross-strait negotiations, which he linked to Taiwan’s participation in international activities.
The eight local government heads, who a DPP lawmaker collectively labeled the “eight blue slaves,” claimed their trip to Beijing was to advance cross-strait exchanges, and to bring economic benefits to their cities and counties.
Their trip is said to have been carefully planned by Beijing; true or not, the fact that the delegation upheld the banner of the “1992 consensus” made the eight complicit in helping Beijing bypass the public’s desire for a new path for cross-strait relations — one that would no longer rely on compradors or preconditions — which was one of the reasons the KMT was swept out of office in January’s elections.
If the “1992 consensus” were so important to Taiwan’s economy, as the delegation members said, the public would have felt it and gladly embraced it.
After all, grandiose ideas and beliefs cannot be dined on, which is what President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said during her campaign and why, since taking office, she has focused on internal structural transformations that could upgrade the economy and deliver a sound financial system and social security.
Good leaders recognize that the public needs economic security and a better standard of living before entertaining abstract thinking.
Taiwanese can plainly see that it is not that the DPP government is incompetent in handling cross-strait affairs, especially when the Tsai administration, in sticking to the middle-ground, has also been attacked by the deep-green camp, which accuses the administration of being too timid about asserting stances that it thinks a DPP president should defend.
DPP heads of local governments would also like cross-strait exchanges to flourish, but the point of the eight “kowtowing” to Beijing is not a wish for more exchanges, but their willingness to play into Beijing’s hands by agreeing there should be a political premise for such exchanges.
The KMT’s action is not unlike when Association of Taiwan Investment Enterprises on the Mainland chairman Wang Ping-sheng (王屏生) last week insulted the Taiwanese public by calling it “sick” for not accepting the “1992 consensus” and the idea of “one China.” It was a self-righteous and arrogant remark made to a democracy.
The trip to Beijing has deepened Taiwanese doubt about the KMT’s resolve to uphold its, rather than Beijing’s, interpretation of the “1992 consensus.” KMT members backing of KMT Chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu’s (洪秀柱) proposal to keep the “1992 consensus,” but remove “one China, different interpretations” in the party’s platform is seen by many as moving one step closer to “one China, same interpretation.”
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
Birth, aging, illness and death are inevitable parts of the human experience. Yet, living well does not necessarily mean dying well. For those who have a chronic illness or cancer, or are bedridden due to significant injuries or disabilities, the remainder of life can be a torment for themselves and a hardship for their caregivers. Even if they wish to end their life with dignity, they are not allowed to do so. Bih Liu-ing (畢柳鶯), former superintendent of Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, introduced the practice of Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking as an alternative to assisted dying, which remains
President William Lai (賴清德) has rightly identified the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as a hostile force; and yet, Taiwan’s response to domestic figures amplifying CCP propaganda remains largely insufficient. The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) recently confirmed that more than 20 Taiwanese entertainers, including high-profile figures such as Ouyang Nana (歐陽娜娜), are under investigation for reposting comments and images supporting People’s Liberation Army (PLA) drills and parroting Beijing’s unification messaging. If found in contravention of the law, they may be fined between NT$100,000 and NT$500,000. That is not a deterrent. It is a symbolic tax on betrayal — perhaps even a way for
RSS