Taiwan’s independence supporters must tell US economist Paul Krugman about tomorrow’s protest and why they will be taking to the streets.
Krugman, who won the Nobel Prize for economics, was in China before arriving in Taiwan on Thursday. He is expected to stay in Taiwan for three days.
Krugman has international influence. If he knew that tomorrow’s demonstration is being held to show how unhappy Taiwanese are about the pro-China policies of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) government, he might mention the issue in his column in the New York Times. This would give the Taiwanese public more of a chance to stop Ma’s “democratic dictatorship” and block his goal of unification with China.
I earnestly hope that senior pro-independence figures, English media outlets who care about Taiwan and academics and other experts who write in English will take advantage of this opportunity to let him hear the true voices of the Taiwanese public, perhaps by making contributions to Krugman’s blog.
Every extra influential friend Taiwan has in the international community gives us an extra chance to work our way out of the current troubles.
A few years ago, Krugman praised Taiwan’s health insurance system, which was initiated and realized by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). In Beijing on Monday, Krugman said — straight out — that China’s huge trade surplus was the result of government interference and that there was no way the world could continue to accept this situation.
Krugman also said that the yuan would not become an international currency in our lifetime because China lacks a solid bond market.
Taiwan’s pro-unification media will not highlight such comments, and may not even report them. These outlets, which view China as the mother country, will only give space to material such as China and the US being dubbed as the “G2.” They could twist Krugman’s statement that he knew nothing about the mooted economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) into making him sound as if he supports an ECFA and that it would be good for both sides of the Taiwan Strait.
Taiwanese media outlets are, after all, brainwashing readers into thinking that relying on China is the only way to save the economy.
We must remind Krugman that Taiwan is facing a grave threat to its democracy. We must tell him that Taiwan has a minority of “high-class Mainlanders” whose fathers gained privileges through bloody, totalitarian rule and that this minority is now using its inherited privileges to control the media and the judiciary to manipulate the Hoklo and Hakka ethnic groups that make up the majority of the population.
We need to let Krugman know about the deal that the KMT has with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to allow the latter to take over Taiwan.
Krugman once warned the world that economic development will not decrease military conflict. Meanwhile, China has warned us of seven circumstances or “red lines” that, if crossed, will result in China taking military action against Taiwan — even as our professional student of a president runs around pinning Taiwan’s hope on Chinese goodwill.
Krugman once said about trade with China: “They give us poisoned products, we give them worthless paper.” He also opposed a Chinese buyout of major US petroleum explorer and marketer Unocal for strategic reasons.
I believe he will listen to the Taiwanese public and I would implore the leaders of pro-Taiwan media outlets to make good use of this opportunity.
Lin Chih-hung is a political commentator.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Much has been said about the significance of the recall vote, but here is what must be said clearly and without euphemism: This vote is not just about legislative misconduct. It is about defending Taiwan’s sovereignty against a “united front” campaign that has crept into the heart of our legislature. Taiwanese voters on Jan. 13 last year made a complex decision. Many supported William Lai (賴清德) for president to keep Taiwan strong on the world stage. At the same time, some hoped that giving the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) a legislative majority would offer a
RSS