The "seven-day coup d'etat" that lasted from March 20 through March 27 is a major incident in Taiwanese history.
The first reason it is so important is that the party-state system of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) boldly attempted to alter the results of a democratic election with this "coup," failing by a hair's breadth, and thereby signalling the end of the party-state.
The other reason is that the consolidation of Taiwan's democracy is no longer in doubt, and from now on we can work on deepening it.
Future historians are sure to add their bit to this incident, perhaps even in the style of the historian Jonathan Spence.
Spence might have written about the former chairman of the Democratic Progressive Party, Hsu Hsin-liang (
president, according to the wishes of the Taiwanese people." Such an account certainly would spotlight the absurdities of Lien, Soong and the pan-blue camp.
This attempted "coup" is neither a fabrication nor an unfounded accusation, and it is not hard to see why both former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) brought it up.
Chen actually said: "It has been said that there was an abortive coup d'etat between March 21 and 27."
Notice the judicious use of the words "It has been said that." To put it more finely, Chen approached the "seven-day coup d'etat" with a political solution in mind.
The pan-blues apparently became livid upon hearing these comments. The People First Party demanded an apology from Lee and Chen within 24 hours, and the KMT asked for evidence to justify use of the coup label.
It's possible that neither man has substantial evidence to offer, but it could also be that they are just not willing to reveal it.
If they do, in fact, have such evidence, and wanted to do something about it, they could throw Taiwan into turmoil. This would be of no obvious advantage to the authorities, and they may well be keeping mum about it for this reason, preferring not to take it any further.
Do I have any basis for saying this? Yes, I do, in the infamous Watergate scandal.
This scandal started when US president Richard Nixon was campaigning for re-election in 1972, and people working for him broke into Democratic Party offices in the Watergate Hotel.
It appears that during his 1968 campaign Nixon had used his "secret emissary" Anna Chennault (
This effectively crippled then US president Lyndon Johnson's foreign policies. Nixon's intention was to demonstrate Johnson's inability to end the war in Vietnam. In return, Nixon promised to help the South unite Vietnam after he was elected. Johnson kept quiet about Nixon's treasonous behavior, even keeping it under wraps when Nixon won the election. He did, however, force Nixon to stop the US war in return for his silence.
In 1972 Nixon sought re-election, and put his neck on the line with the Watergate burglary to find out whether the Democrats were planning to use the stick of his past deeds to beat him with.
Nixon's behavior was in fact treasonous, but Johnson kept it under wraps for the good of the country. Is this the situation facing Chen?
Chin Heng-wei is editor in chief of Contemporary Monthly.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
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
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS