Although I knew about the government’s suppression of public demonstrations against the visit by Chinese envoy Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), I was still startled when I saw the documentary Red Caution (紅色戒嚴). The protesters were indeed as brave as the theme song of the documentary said: “I want to reach out and test how hot the flames are.”
It is never easy to protect freedom and rights. This protest alone resulted in 18 arrests and nearly 300 civilian injuries from police beatings. Chinese rocker Ao Bo (敖博), who was persecuted and forced into exile in Sweden for supporting Taiwan, sings in his latest song that Taiwanese democracy has been kidnapped and Taiwanese freedom put in jail. This tells of the realities facing today’s Taiwan.
This big step backward in the nation’s democracy and human rights is directly related to President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) “one China” policy, which is both illogical and deceitful. In contrast, the green camp’s proposal to make a new constitution, change the nation’s title and move toward becoming a new country at least makes sense regardless of whether one agrees with the idea.
It was also logical for dictator Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and his son Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) to insist that the Republic of China (ROC) represented China, and because they did not recognize the rule of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) People’s Republic of China (PRC) over China, Chiang Ching-kuo insisted on his “three noes” policy — no contact, no negotiation and no concession. It was also logical for former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) to refer to the relationship between Taiwan and China as a “state-to-state” relationship because he recognized the PRC rule over the Chinese mainland while pointing out that the ROC existed in Taiwan with jurisdiction over only Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu.
The Ma administration’s “one China” policy, however, is illogical. If you return to the era of the two Chiangs and insist that there is only one China and that the ROC represents that China, then you do not recognize CCP rule over the Chinese mainland but view it as an un-free part of the ROC. Once Ma took power, he not only initiated contact, but also compromised and cooperated with a CCP that he should not have even recognized. During Chen’s visit to Taipei, Ma said that if the government could not protect Chen, it could not call itself a government. Worse yet, national flags were not displayed, but PRC flags were. It is clear which China Ma recognizes.
Under the two Chiangs, anti-communist activities were supported worldwide. However, Ma shows no sympathy toward the persecuted people in the “non-free region,” and publicly commends the CCP for its “progress” while distancing himself from anti-communist activities. The government didn’t even inquire about the arrest of a member of the pro-Chinese pan-blue alliance because it was afraid to displease China.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has never dared fly — and has even abandoned — the national flag in Taiwan, China or at any international event. This tells us that the Ma administration knows better than anyone that the ROC has come to an end.
Although the cooperation between Ma and China makes the government seem strong, it is not. Because his policies are entirely illogical, the government is unable to reach China or Taiwan.
When a party’s policies are illogical, they are bound to fail. Despite all the glorious talk about KMT-CCP cooperation, more than 80 percent of Taiwanese still see themselves as Taiwanese. Regardless of what the Ma government does as it strives for eventual unification, this is a force that can never be suppressed.
Cao Changqing is a writer based in the US.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming
RSS