The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) had been eagerly anticipating Taiwan’s presidential and legislative elections this year ever since President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) 2016 victory upset its plans, and it has worked hard since then to frustrate Tsai’s efforts to improve the nation’s economy and forge cross-strait dialogue.
Its “united front” efforts have let slip the dogs of war to infiltrate, distort and manipulate in an attempt to see the reins of government in Taiwan returned to the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which Beijing regards as far more amenable to its cause.
Taiwanese voters on Saturday last week once again thwarted Beijing’s plans, sending a clear message that, on the level of cross-strait relations at least — the scale of the presidential victory was not reflected in the party vote in the legislative elections — they preferred the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) vision over that of the KMT, and felt more comfortable under Tsai’s stewardship than what the KMT’s candidate was offering.
The results should have been a confirmation that 2016 was not simply an inconvenient blip, and was a true representation of the Taiwanese public will. It would be reasonable for Beijing to adjust its calculations accordingly.
However, as the legislative elections showed, the KMT has retained its core voter base. Some of its supporters hope for unification, others remember the heyday of Taiwan’s economic miracle under the KMT before China opened its market to the world, associating the KMT with economic prosperity.
Yet as time goes on, the proportion of the electorate that remembers this heyday will shrink, just as the proportion of the electorate that has known nothing but life in a democratic system, and who identify with Taiwan over China, increases.
If the CCP wants to win Taiwanese hearts and minds, and was hoping for the KMT’s assistance, time is trickling away.
In addition to the aforementioned “natural independence” effect, the CCP has to accept that the DPP will continue to be the ruling party, at least in the short term.
Not only does Beijing have another four years of a Tsai presidency to contend with, it should prepare for the possibility that vice president-elect William Lai (賴清德), her natural successor within the DPP, could succeed her as president. The former Tainan mayor is more openly pro-independence than Tsai, and he enjoys broad support within the party.
After four years of rejecting dialogue with Tsai because of her refusal to enter talks with the so-called “1992 consensus” as a prerequisite, Beijing might now be wise to soften its approach and compromise on its demands, but it appears to be in no mood to do so yet, judging by the reaction yesterday of China’s Taiwan Affairs Office.
Office spokesman Ma Hsiao-kuang (馬曉光) told a Beijing news conference that the CCP would continue to insist on the “1992 consensus” as a prerequisite to dialogue.
Advocating Taiwan independence was the greatest threat to cross-strait peace and stability, and Beijing was determined to frustrate these efforts, he said, citing word-for-word parts of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) speech to the opening of the CCP’s 19th National Congress on Oct. 18, 2017.
Nobody should obstruct the peaceful and stable development of cross-strait relations, he said, without a hint of irony.
Finally, he reiterated Beijing’s contention that Taiwan belongs to all Chinese, including the Taiwanese, and Taiwan’s future was for all Chinese people to decide together.
One could hope that Ma’s rhetoric was merely the opening sally in anticipation of engaging in pragmatic dialogue. Unfortunately, nothing the CCP has done in the past suggests that this is likely.
China badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
After more than three weeks since the Honduran elections took place, its National Electoral Council finally certified the new president of Honduras. During the campaign, the two leading contenders, Nasry Asfura and Salvador Nasralla, who according to the council were separated by 27,026 votes in the final tally, promised to restore diplomatic ties with Taiwan if elected. Nasralla refused to accept the result and said that he would challenge all the irregularities in court. However, with formal recognition from the US and rapid acknowledgment from key regional governments, including Argentina and Panama, a reversal of the results appears institutionally and politically
Legislators of the opposition parties, consisting of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), on Friday moved to initiate impeachment proceedings against President William Lai (賴清德). They accused Lai of undermining the nation’s constitutional order and democracy. For anyone who has been paying attention to the actions of the KMT and the TPP in the legislature since they gained a combined majority in February last year, pushing through constitutionally dubious legislation, defunding the Control Yuan and ensuring that the Constitutional Court is unable to operate properly, such an accusation borders the absurd. That they are basing this
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) was on Monday last week invited to give a talk to students of Soochow University, but her responses to questions raised by students and lecturers became a controversial incident and sparked public discussion over the following days. The student association of the university’s Department of Political Science, which hosted the event, on Saturday issued a statement urging people to stop “doxxing,” harassing and attacking the students who raised questions at the event, and called for rational discussion of the talk. Criticism should be directed at viewpoints, opinions or policies, not students, they said, adding
RSS