President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has said several times that he believes Taiwan’s democracy can act as a positive example for China and that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) will only consider unification if and when Beijing embraces universal suffrage.
Ma’s theory is not unique. It is almost identical to that of the US government, which for many years has trumpeted its policy of engagement with Beijing as a way of changing China’s authoritarian system, leading to its eventual democratization.
But were it to be ranked on its effectiveness so far, the US policy would most definitely receive a failing grade.
Thirty years of foreign investment-fueled economic growth has only succeeded in strengthening the position of China’s leaders, making them more belligerent, while democracy seems further away now than at any point since the Cultural Revolution.
The utter failure of the US’ policy was apparent during US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s February visit to Beijing, when she said issues such as human rights couldn’t be allowed to “interfere” with the tackling of economic problems.
Clinton’s reluctance to bring up issues unpalatable to Chinese leaders seems to indicate that instead of changing China, engagement has produced the opposite effect.
With its growing economic clout, China now has the ability to influence those who choose to have closer ties with it — including the world’s sole remaining superpower.
This is a lesson that people in Taiwan are only now beginning to learn.
The latest apparent sign of this phenomenon came earlier this week when Chinese dissident Ji Xiaofeng (紀曉峰) accused Taiwanese intelligence agencies — in behavior reminiscent of their Chinese counterparts — of collecting information on Xinjiang and Tibet independence activists with a view to preventing them from entering Taiwan.
The report was rebutted by the agencies concerned, but it would be foolish to assume that the Ma government is incapable of such behavior given its track record — and political agenda.
The effects of Ma’s policy of snuggling up to China were brought into sharp focus in December by his rejection of a possible visit to Taiwan by the Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama, something he had welcomed just nine months earlier.
This came just a month after November’s visit by Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), during which police confiscated national flags and used violence against unarmed protesters.
Add to that news that Taiwan is no longer ranked as Asia’s freest press: The US-based Freedom House’s recent annual freedom of the press survey saw Taiwan’s ranking slip 11 spots to 43rd place from last year, which makes it clear which side of the Taiwan Strait is having the bigger effect on the other.
If a country as powerful as the US has, to all intents and purposes, admitted defeat in its attempts to influence China, it does not take a genius to work out what the consequences will be for Taiwan with the Ma administration’s accelerating rapprochement.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS