At an event organized by Taiwanese expatriates in the US, former vice president Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) mentioned, of his own accord, the meeting in Singapore between former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Chinese President Xi Jin-ping (習近平). At the meeting, in front the media, Ma talked about the idea of “one China,” but left out the phrase “with each side having its own interpretation.”
According to Wu, by leaving out the last part of his cross-strait principle, Ma should have “had points deducted.”
The subtle comment has received support from the likes of former premier Hau Pei-tsun (郝柏村). The fact that Wu, one of the leading figures of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), publicly commented on the meeting at this point in time is significant — not only for the KMT, a party in serious decline, but also for its rival, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), and indeed the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is still struggling to work with the DPP.
Despite Wu’s deliberate obtuseness, his message carries a significance worth celebrating. It is the first criticism from within the KMT over Ma’s simplification of the “1992 consensus.”
Considering that the KMT under Chairperson Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) has adopted new policy platforms advocating the signing of a peace pact with China, Wu’s comment made clear that certain members of the party do not want to be associated with such a stance — and not necessarily out of a desire to compete with Hung.
The KMT rarely states its stance on cross-strait issues in direct terms, but this time, Wu and others are suggesting that there is a definitive difference between “one China, with each side having its own interpretation” and only “one China.” Traditionally, the KMT has interpreted “one China” as the Republic of China (ROC).
While many Taiwanese find that to be slightly out of touch with reality, it is nonetheless a different stance from that of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), which considers itself to be the only China. The KMT still openly defies the “one China” principle as formulated and held to by the PRC.
If Ma, near the end of his presidency, was steering the country toward eventual unification with China, Hung has pushed for the same goal with even more vigor.
However, with another KMT chairperson election scheduled for next year, many members are trying to redirect the party to its original goal of safeguarding the ROC as the one and only China, believing such a change is essential for its survival.
Recent changes within the KMT show politicians need to follow public opinion and evolve so that they are in touch with the electorate, or they are voted out. Smart politicians are always aware of this.
Whether one can garner public support depends on the kind of platforms one decides to embrace, which should be a choice made based on reason and rationality.
The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that Taiwan cannot participate in the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) because it is not a nation. Its failure to recognize several recent developments in Taiwan could eventually result in the two nations going their separate ways.
First, in order to mislead Taiwanese into believing that the DPP should be held responsible for the nation’s exclusion from the ICAO Assembly, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) organized a meeting with eight city and county leaders from Taiwan who support the so-called “1992 consensus.” Such a tactic, designed to divide Taiwanese opinion, has failed, as the KMT ceased to cooperate.
By denying Taiwan, or the ROC, the status of an independent and sovereign nation, Beijing has conversely helped to unite the pan-blue and pan-green camps, with key KMT figures now shifting to a middle-of-the-road approach on cross-strait issues.
Second, Beijing is obsessed with warning Taiwan that it is misreading the situation. However, the reality is quite different: Taiwanese know exactly what they are doing. When they cast their ballots on Jan. 16, they made their choices knowing full well the consequences.
The CCP’s attitude toward Taiwan since President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) inauguration on May 20 has only confirmed that friendly gestures from Taiwan can never win respect from China. If respect is given based on friendly feelings, it can certainly be taken back whenever feelings change.
Beijing has repeatedly misread the situation in Taiwan, as it is seemingly quite out of touch with public opinion. According to a recent poll more than 70 percent of Taiwanese find the CCP’s approach on cross-strait issues overbearing. Apparently, Beijing’s failure to understand the Taiwanese’ collective will has placed it back to square one after eight years of hard work aimed at improving cross-strait ties.
Third, China has always been concerned with intervention from the international community, especially that from the US, which it fears might conspire to work with Taiwan against it should the circumstances arise. Despite this, China has deliberately and continually inflicted pain and suffering on Taiwanese, only spurring Taiwanese to cooperate with the US and Japan.
While this is clearly a strategic mistake, Beijing has nonetheless been doing so for years, regardless of the ruling party in Taiwan, albeit to varying degrees. In the long term, it has caused more harm to China than to Taiwan. Ironically, all this has been occurring at a time when China is rising according to many metrics.
That China should create such a self-destructive situation by motivating cooperation between Taiwan and other countries shows that despite its economic success, in civil affairs it still has a long way to go to catch up with other nations.
Beijing thought it only needed the KMT to replace the DPP, but in reality, after Taiwan’s ICAO setback — another ploy to put pressure on the DPP — members of the KMT seem to have adjusted their cross-strait approach and have started leaning closer to the DPP.
The result has been a new political balance offsetting pressure from Beijing. The force behind this new balance is democracy.
Indeed, it is precisely because Beijing does not understand democracy that it will never be able to truly understand Taiwan.
Translated by Tu Yu-an
Speaking at the Copenhagen Democracy Summit on May 13, former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said that democracies must remain united and that “Taiwan’s security is essential to regional stability and to defending democratic values amid mounting authoritarianism.” Earlier that day, Tsai had met with a group of Danish parliamentarians led by Danish Parliament Speaker Pia Kjaersgaard, who has visited Taiwan many times, most recently in November last year, when she met with President William Lai (賴清德) at the Presidential Office. Kjaersgaard had told Lai: “I can assure you that ... you can count on us. You can count on our support
Denmark has consistently defended Greenland in light of US President Donald Trump’s interests and has provided unwavering support to Ukraine during its war with Russia. Denmark can be proud of its clear support for peoples’ democratic right to determine their own future. However, this democratic ideal completely falls apart when it comes to Taiwan — and it raises important questions about Denmark’s commitment to supporting democracies. Taiwan lives under daily military threats from China, which seeks to take over Taiwan, by force if necessary — an annexation that only a very small minority in Taiwan supports. Denmark has given China a
Many local news media over the past week have reported on Internet personality Holger Chen’s (陳之漢) first visit to China between Tuesday last week and yesterday, as remarks he made during a live stream have sparked wide discussions and strong criticism across the Taiwan Strait. Chen, better known as Kuan Chang (館長), is a former gang member turned fitness celebrity and businessman. He is known for his live streams, which are full of foul-mouthed and hypermasculine commentary. He had previously spoken out against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and criticized Taiwanese who “enjoy the freedom in Taiwan, but want China’s money”
A high-school student surnamed Yang (楊) gained admissions to several prestigious medical schools recently. However, when Yang shared his “learning portfolio” on social media, he was caught exaggerating and even falsifying content, and his admissions were revoked. Now he has to take the “advanced subjects test” scheduled for next month. With his outstanding performance in the general scholastic ability test (GSAT), Yang successfully gained admissions to five prestigious medical schools. However, his university dreams have now been frustrated by the “flaws” in his learning portfolio. This is a wake-up call not only for students, but also teachers. Yang did make a big
RSS