Ma’s inaccurate language
In his recent teleconference with Harvard University, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) made the statement: “The time for unification at this stage is not ripe yet.”
In making this statement, Ma misrepresents social and political realities in Taiwan. It is certainly true that the time for unification between Taiwan and China is not ripe.
In using this particular language, however, Ma implies that Taiwanese are moving toward a time ripe for unification. In fact, public opinion polls in Taiwan indicate quite clearly that Taiwanese are moving in the opposite direction. A variety of polls from different organizations consistently show an increase in Taiwanese versus Chinese identity and a greater desire for formal, internationally recognized independence for Taiwan.
Why would the democratically elected leader of Taiwan choose to inaccurately represent the opinions and attitudes of his constituents?
In making this statement, Ma is trying to appease the leaders in Beijing who, of course, insist that unification with Taiwan is one of China’s core interests, and the deep-blue members of his party who still hold on to their dream of unification.
Ma’s appeasing language is very dangerous, however, because it sends the rest of the world the message that Taiwanese are moving toward a desire for unification and therefore encourages leaders in foreign governments to base their China and Taiwan policies on an inaccurate interpretation of trends in Taiwan.
Ma is well advised to remember that he was elected to represent the interests of the 23 million people in Taiwan, and not the feelings of the leaders in Beijing. He should be more careful in choosing his words. Given the diplomatic sensitivity of the issue, one might understand why Ma does not make the statement, “the time for independence is not ripe yet,” but he could certainly make the statement, “the time for the 23 million people of Taiwan to formally decide on their future status is not ripe yet.”
This language more accurately represents the realities in Taiwan and demonstrates the kind of ambiguity that Ma claims to love so much when he discusses his “1992 consensus.”
Don Rodgers
Visiting Associate Professor of Political Science at Soochow University,
Taipei
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Strategic thinker Carl von Clausewitz has said that “war is politics by other means,” while investment guru Warren Buffett has said that “tariffs are an act of war.” Both aphorisms apply to China, which has long been engaged in a multifront political, economic and informational war against the US and the rest of the West. Kinetically also, China has launched the early stages of actual global conflict with its threats and aggressive moves against Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan, and its support for North Korea’s reckless actions against South Korea that could reignite the Korean War. Former US presidents Barack Obama
The pan-blue camp in the era after the rule of the two Chiangs — former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) — can be roughly divided into two main factions: the “true blue,” who insist on opposing communism to protect the Republic of China (ROC), and the “red-blue,” who completely reject the current government and would rather collude with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to control Taiwan. The families of the former group suffered brutally under the hands of communist thugs in China. They know the CPP well and harbor a deep hatred for it — the two
RSS