Yesterday marked the 87th anniversary of the May Fourth Movement, an event commemorated by both the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). That the CCP does so is understandable, because it sees it as a CCP-led revolutionary movement that helped spread Marxism in China.
The KMT and its supporters of course had other motives for commemorating the anniversary: They wanted to let China know that they accept the "one China"-based "united front" strategy toward Taiwan. And the manner of their celebrations was ridiculous: At KMT headquarters, they displayed a letter written by Mao Zedong (毛澤東) while he was a member of the KMT, and even bragged that he had been an "alternate executive member" of the KMT's central leadership.
The director of the KMT's history archives praised Mao, saying that at the time, "he was a young man with novel thinking." And KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) almost gave Mao a compliment when he said that, "Mao Zedong was a historical person, so we should look at him through the lens of history."
A disgraced dictator who used to be a KMT member -- how can that be the pride of Ma and his supporters? If Hitler had been a KMT member, would they have boasted about that, too? Even if Ma and his supporters could pretend to know nothing about the sufferings of the Chinese people under the CCP's rule, they cannot avoid the fact that thousands of KMT members were slaughtered by the CCP, and that families of the KMT members who remained behind in China were treated as second-rate citizens and persecuted under Mao's rule.
That Ma and the KMT take pride in having had a relationship of sorts with Mao shows how low they have sunk. Not long ago, Ma also praised another Chinese dictator when he said that the KMT would produce "its own" Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤). Some have said that "Chairman Ma" was joking, but the laugh is on Ma, as his views of Mao show a vulgarity that is turning him into a laughing stock.
During the recent meeting between Ma and President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), Ma also surprised us all by talking widely about the non-existent "1992 consensus" and saying with inflated self-importance that if the problem lay with the CCP, then the KMT would find ways to resolve it.
The KMT was defeated by the CCP and forced to flee to Taiwan, so if anyone has anything to boast about, it certainly isn't the KMT. How can Ma have the gall to say that the KMT understands and can handle the CCP? That is a sign of political illiteracy.
Cleverly, Chen replied by saying that if former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) would ask Hu to state in public that his interpretation of "one China" meant "one China, with each side having its own interpretation," then Chen would also respect it. Quietly and without conviction, Ma replied that he would ask Lien to bring Chen's request to Hu.
The world has now seen that Lien did not take Chen's message to Beijing for his meeting with Hu, and that Ma never dared ask Lien to do so.
From praising Hu and commemorating Mao to saying that the KMT can handle the CCP, Ma's actions only serve to inform the public that, come 2008 and the next presidential election, they should vote to have Ma sent to a kindergarten in China so he can gain some measure of understanding of the Communist world and put an end to his political naivete.
Cao Changqing is a writer based in the US.
Translated by Perry Svensson
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
RSS