Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Chang Ching-fang (張清芳) and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei County Councilor Wang Chin-yuan (王景源) held a joint press conference yesterday to point out that China's attempt to settle the score with Chi Mei Corporation (奇美實業) was beginning to have after-effects. The two used examples to highlight several recent cases of unethical Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members trying to pin crimes on Taiwanese businessmen in order to make a profit for themselves.
The naming by Chinese authorities of Chi Mei Chairman Hsu Wen-lung (許文龍) and their repeated statements that they do not welcome DPP-friendly businessmen have had an immediate effect. The number of Taiwanese businessmen returning to Taiwan to celebrate Dragon Boat festival declined sharply from last year, from 120 to 80. Businessmen are cautious and afraid that they will be labelled pro-DPP.
We cannot help thinking of Shimpei Goto's (
Goto's comment refers to a shameful episode in Taiwan's history. However, during his eight-year term (1898 to 1906) as deputy to Taiwan's governor-general, Gentaro Kodama, Goto and Kodama jointly laid the foundation for Japanese colonial rule. When Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek's (蔣中正) regime relocated to Taiwan in 1949, he followed Goto's strategy and the regime enjoyed a stable rule for over half a century.
But this was the case before Taiwan became an independent sovereign state. For the Taiwanese people at that time, whoever arrived was the king, and they only wanted to make money and live a quite life. As a result, many business people tried to build political connections. They made compromises for the sake of their business interests, and did not care about national dignity or society's collective interests.
But during the KMT's half-century rule, "Taiwan consciousness" was first introduced by the opposition at the time, and was further promoted by former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝). Taiwanese people are no longer content with merely making money and living a quiet life.
Now, China has determined to turn its back on conciliatory gestures to win goodwill and has decided to put pressure on Taiwanese business people. The result it hopes to achieve is that of "killing one person to frighten the multitude." From the initial, superficial response, we can see the poison of colonial oppression at work, calling on Taiwanese business people to revert to former habits of "fearing death, loving money and seeking flattery."
But what is the situation beneath the surface? China may have underestimated the strength of the burgeoning Taiwanese consciousness. This makes one think of the calls from South Koreans to cancel plans to deploy troops following the kidnapping by Iraqi terrorists of Kim Sun-il earlier this month. Within 24 hours of news that he had been beheaded, there was an about-face in South Korean public opinion and many are now calling for the destruction of Iraq.
What this incident makes clear is that one should not push against the limits of national self-respect. Whether Shimpei Goto's assessment of the Taiwanese character remains valid today remains to be seen. We are willing to repeatedly remind China that cross-strait trade benefits both parties and that anyone who contributes to the development of commercial links and cooperation across the strait deserves to be encouraged. We hope that China can restrain its ballooning egotism and start looking at the long-term results, and make forward-looking plans for cross-strait economic development.
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
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
RSS