In September 2014, New Party Chairman Yok Mu-ming (郁慕明), accompanied by the party’s spiritual leader, Hsu Li-nung (許歷農), led a contingent of Taiwanese politicians to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing. This was three years before Hsu declared that the New Party would no longer oppose the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and would push for unification.
At the meeting, Xi told Yok that the “one country, two systems” model would be the optimal way to peacefully and respectfully unify the political systems of China and Taiwan under the umbrella of the Chinese nation.
That meeting was the first time that a Chinese national leader spoke face-to-face with the leader of a Taiwanese party about the concept of implementing a “one country, two systems” model in Taiwan.
Xi said that Taiwanese “secessionist forces” needed to be stopped and that Taiwan’s younger generation needed to understand that its future was tied to that of China’s.
Yok mirrored Xi’s sentiments on that occasion, just as he reiterated the same old ideas at an event on Saturday last week marking 26 years since the New Party’s founding.
It is in this context, repeating the hopes and policy of the president of a hostile country, that Yok’s remarks — calling for the implementation of “one country, two systems” in Taiwan, rooting out the “secessionists” and promoting peaceful coexistence of the PRC and the Republic of China (ROC) under the umbrella of “China” — should be considered.
Yok said his model of coexistence was an entirely different animal from the “one country, two systems” currently foundering in Hong Kong, although it is difficult to see how he differentiates the two.
At its most fundamental, the idea makes perfect sense: The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party agree that there is only one China, and both have professed to represent that China.
However, Taiwanese remain divided over whether they would like to participate in a part of China, for a variety of reasons. Many polls show that increasing numbers of Taiwanese are identifying as Taiwanese, not Chinese, and not even those who identify primarily as Chinese would consider Taiwan to represent China before the world anymore.
When Xi spoke in 2014 of mutual respect for the people under the systems, he added that there were, after all, 1.4 billion people in China, compared with the 23 million in Taiwan. Behind his words was the idea that reality would eventually reflect the needs of the Chinese, not the Taiwanese.
Yok is simply echoing Xi’s words, but his suggestion that Taiwan and China could coexist as equal partners is ingenious, not as a solution, but as a sleight of hand: It is his bid to counter the generational sea change of “natural independence” that has been happening in Taiwan.
His bluff relies heavily on a willful blindness, not only to what has been happening in Hong Kong over the past two months, but what Beijing has been attempting over there since 1997 — in particular since Xi took power.
For all of Yok’s promoting of ideas of the leader of a hostile power, which would lead to the loss of Taiwan’s sovereignty, and his disingenuous attempt at hoodwinking the younger generation into believing in a better future that they do not want and will almost certainly never have — especially when many commentators are fearing a reprisal of the Tiananmen Massacre in Hong Kong in the very near future — the Mainland Affairs Council gave him a mere slap on the wrist, warning him that he is sailing too close to the wind.
Perhaps it is about time that the government showed a bit of backbone in dealing with the New Party’s dangerous rhetoric.
President William Lai (賴清德) attended a dinner held by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) when representatives from the group visited Taiwan in October. In a speech at the event, Lai highlighted similarities in the geopolitical challenges faced by Israel and Taiwan, saying that the two countries “stand on the front line against authoritarianism.” Lai noted how Taiwan had “immediately condemned” the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas and had provided humanitarian aid. Lai was heavily criticized from some quarters for standing with AIPAC and Israel. On Nov. 4, the Taipei Times published an opinion article (“Speak out on the
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
News about expanding security cooperation between Israel and Taiwan, including the visits of Deputy Minister of National Defense Po Horng-huei (柏鴻輝) in September and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Francois Wu (吳志中) this month, as well as growing ties in areas such as missile defense and cybersecurity, should not be viewed as isolated events. The emphasis on missile defense, including Taiwan’s newly introduced T-Dome project, is simply the most visible sign of a deeper trend that has been taking shape quietly over the past two to three years. Taipei is seeking to expand security and defense cooperation with Israel, something officials
“Can you tell me where the time and motivation will come from to get students to improve their English proficiency in four years of university?” The teacher’s question — not accusatory, just slightly exasperated — was directed at the panelists at the end of a recent conference on English language learning at Taiwanese universities. Perhaps thankfully for the professors on stage, her question was too big for the five minutes remaining. However, it hung over the venue like an ominous cloud on an otherwise sunny-skies day of research into English as a medium of instruction and the government’s Bilingual Nation 2030