Several Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have proposed amendments to the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例) — which some have dubbed “amendments targeting Chinese Communist Party (CCP) agents” — in an effort to prevent people from propagandizing for Beijing, thereby undermining security.
However, what if the biggest CCP agent in the nation is a former president?
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), at a seminar he held on Saturday, accused President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration of exploiting “dried mango strips” — a wordplay on “a sense of the nation’s impending doom” — and urged Tsai to acknowledge the so-called “1992 consensus.”
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in his “Message to Compatriots in Taiwan” on Jan. 2 changed the definition of the fictitious “1992 consensus” to just “one China,” under which there are “two systems” — a formula which he proposed for Taiwan to fulfill his aim of “unifying the two sides of the Taiwan Strait.” The “different interpretations” component in the older version of the “consensus” was altogether discarded.
As such, it was astounding that Ma had the cheek to urge Tsai to acknowledge the “consensus.” Like so many DPP politicians have repeatedly pointed out — and Ma just as stubbornly ignored — the “consensus” no longer has any space for the survival of the Republic of China, which, in effect, means no room for the survival of Taiwan.
Put simply: If Tsai took his advice, she would be committing treason.
No less appalling was Ma’s audacity to state that the “consensus” was reaffirmed during his meeting with Xi in 2015 — during which he infamously shrank from mentioning the “different interpretations” part to Xi and therefore ended up asserting, to Beijing’s advantage, the “one China” component of the “consensus.”
Is Ma trying to safeguard his legacy by deliberately ignoring Xi’s ambition to annex Taiwan? Or is he pushing for unification like so many people had accused him of doing even when he was still in office? Had he made the remarks in 2016, it would have seemed like the former. Now, it appears that the latter is more plausible.
In his speech, Ma used every trick in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) book to slam Tsai, including the criticism that Tsai had lost seven of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, while he only lost one during his time in office.
Ma credited this to a “diplomatic truce” his administration had with Beijing, which shows that he is either hopelessly naive or outright deceiving to not have realized that Beijing was simply “boiling the frog slowly.”
Ma’s cross-strait policy relied on opening up the nation’s economy to China in exchange for uncertain prosperity.
If the KMT were still in power, China would be able to significantly increase its leverage over Taiwan’s economy, and by the time it has the nation by the throat, Ma would likely wake up one day to find that the nation’s diplomatic allies have been reduced to zero.
Ma can tout how cordial cross-strait relations were during his terms all he wants, but the public should be reminded that close ties with China simply means that Taiwan is one step closer to being assimilated and absorbed by its large neighbor, as the CCP will only ever have one goal no matter who Taiwan’s president is — to annex Taiwan.
So in reply to the topic of Ma’s seminar — “Where did the dried mango strips come from?” — the answer should be self-explanatory.
The image was oddly quiet. No speeches, no flags, no dramatic announcements — just a Chinese cargo ship cutting through arctic ice and arriving in Britain in October. The Istanbul Bridge completed a journey that once existed only in theory, shaving weeks off traditional shipping routes. On paper, it was a story about efficiency. In strategic terms, it was about timing. Much like politics, arriving early matters. Especially when the route, the rules and the traffic are still undefined. For years, global politics has trained us to watch the loud moments: warships in the Taiwan Strait, sanctions announced at news conferences, leaders trading
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
The Executive Yuan and the Presidential Office on Monday announced that they would not countersign or promulgate the amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) passed by the Legislative Yuan — a first in the nation’s history and the ultimate measure the central government could take to counter what it called an unconstitutional legislation. Since taking office last year, the legislature — dominated by the opposition alliance of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party — has passed or proposed a slew of legislation that has stirred controversy and debate, such as extending
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators have twice blocked President William Lai’s (賴清德) special defense budget bill in the Procedure Committee, preventing it from entering discussion or review. Meanwhile, KMT Legislator Chen Yu-jen (陳玉珍) proposed amendments that would enable lawmakers to use budgets for their assistants at their own discretion — with no requirement for receipts, staff registers, upper or lower headcount limits, or usage restrictions — prompting protest from legislative assistants. After the new legislature convened in February, the KMT joined forces with the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and, leveraging their slim majority, introduced bills that undermine the Constitution, disrupt constitutional