Acrid tree hugging
Dear Johnny,
Your language is acrid — but mostly meets the points. “Fraud” and “face” seem to match Chinese culture as elegantly as its glamorous and mystic history — what a mystery!
Please write more on the hazards of Taiwan’s destruction by man. Concrete is not the concretion of the Formosa (Beautiful) Island. The Taipei 101 tower, the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant (I hope it will serve merely as a museum some day), the gigantomanic Hsuehshan tunnel — hell, why not a gondola to everyone’s residence everywhere to avoid road traffic, or even across the Taiwan Strait?
Don’t forget the Kaohsiung City Government’s proposal to build a gondola from the 85-story Tuntext tower across the harbor to Qijin (Cijin or Chi-Chin or Tshi-dshin or however you want to write it).
Engelbert Altenburger
I-Shou University
Johnny replies: I prefer to write it as 旗津, but Cijin will have to suffice for you Tongyong diehards. And that’s the way it’s gonna stay unless the Cabinet can bribe the Kaohsiung City Government into abandoning Tongyong and using Hanyu pinyin, thereby replacing the “C” with a “Q.” Snore.
As for your environmental compliment, I have to say it’s a strange experience being praised for my love of Mother Nature given that in my day I loved shooting helpless animals and vegetation as much as the next idiot doing compulsory military service. Back in those days I only saw weeds, not trees. These days I only see cement, not trees.
Regional trappings
Dear Johnny,
I found President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) recent promotion of Taiwan as a “region” of a surreal Republic of China quite interesting.
It is a given that the state-controlled Chinese media will have grabbed hold of his statement that relations between Taiwan and China are not state-to-state in nature but region-to-region.
But the Chinese media will have almost certainly truncated Ma’s theory of a greater Republic of China (ROC) comprising Taiwan (and the islands under its control), China, the Republic of Mongolia, what is now Russian territory and the territory of a number of central Asian states.
It seems painfully obvious to me that the “region to region” statement will do nothing for the status of either Taiwan or the surreal ROC and will simply be seized by the Chinese media as justification for eventual annexation of Taiwan — the inevitable, final nail in the coffin of the ROC’s legacy (except for a few nostalgic ethnic Chinese living abroad with their sentimental Double Ten celebrations).
Anyway, I was wondering how much the credibility of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) depends on prolonging the concept of the ROC — real or surreal. If the KMT were to embrace the concept of localization or “Taiwanization” and were to face up to the blatantly obvious fact that the area Taipei exercises sovereignty over does not include China, then the logical thing for the KMT to do would be to change its name to the “Taiwanese Nationalist Party.”
I know that many who read this statement would roll their eyes and call me a dumb big nose but I think there is a link between the KMT maintaining credibility (indeed, the justification for its existence) and the party seeking to prolong the ROC in some form or another.
Andrew Whyte
Johnny replies: How about being called a smart big nose? The key to KMT credibility is much the same as the key to the credibility of the Chinese Communist Party: practical results and economic prowess. Without that credibility, the KMT would get kicked out on election day — assuming there are more to come — while the Chinese would need to increase police and military spending to cope with the riots of the landless, jobless and mirthless.
The irony is that both parties are enslaved to ideological trappings (even if most don’t really believe in them) and struggle to move forward when these trappings and economics clash.
Well, what did you expect? They all came from the same household of revolutionaries in the first place — before embarking on the biggest and bloodiest family tiff in the history of modern warfare.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS