People have thrown so many shoes at President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) lately that by now he must be at risk of developing scabies and losing all his hair from all that old, stinky footwear. Despite this, he seemed completely at ease in a recent interview with the Washington Post. Although Ma perhaps thinks that his performance in interviews with foreign media can be used for domestic consumption, it seems clear that what he is trying to do is declare his position to the US and China by hiding behind the Taiwanese public.
However, if he really intends his activities in a foreign context to be used for domestic consumption, then the Post interview was a complete failure. Ma’s answers were misleading and evasive, and made it clear how disconnected he is from the Taiwanese public. Among the photographs that accompanied the interview in the print edition, a picture of an anti-Ma demonstration was made four times larger than another photo depicting him raising his fist.
For Ma, the most urgent task is to declare his position to the outside world. His statements keep changing and the surprising remarks he made in his Double Ten National Day address on Oct. 10 that “cross-strait relations are not a matter of international relations” made US academics with an interest in Taiwan suspect that he is preparing to walk that last mile toward surrender.
It was only because he wanted to dispel US suspicions that he suddenly remembered that the public are the masters in a democratic nation and therefore mentioned the idea of holding a referendum on political talks with China, saying that: “We thought it would be best to first put it to a referendum to confirm that we had strong public support.”
However, if this is true, then why does the president consistently ignore public opinion, while arbitrarily accepting the “one China” framework and rejecting the view that the nature of cross-strait relations are international or state-to-state?
In the interview, Ma also gave a response to Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) call for Taipei to engage Beijing in talks about “political issues.” Ma divided “political issues” into two categories: procedural talks of a political nature and political talks that deal with terminating the Republic of China and Taiwanese sovereignty.
He also hid behind the public, saying that cross-strait political talks would require a national referendum to be held first because that would make it “easier to move on with discussions.”
However, he also signaled to Beijing that: “we will not, either domestically or abroad, promote ‘two Chinas,’ ‘one China, one Taiwan,’ or ‘Taiwan independence.’”
Given that Ma is promoting the idea of holding a referendum, why does he then in effect force his views upon public opinion by arbitrarily ruling out Taiwanese citizens’ freedom to choose?
The conditions for establishing diplomatic relations between China and the US included accepting the “one China” principle, Washington’s recognition of the People’s Republic of China as the only legal government of China and demands that the US not promote the principles of “two Chinas,” “one China, one Taiwan,” or Taiwanese independence.
However, in yielding to China, Ma is ignoring that Taiwan is democratized, as well as what is acceptable to the Taiwanese public.
Anyone who ignores public opinion, but is quick to hide behind the people, will have to live with being the object of ridicule. Protecting Taiwan’s sovereignty means standing on the side of the Taiwanese public.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
With the Year of the Snake reaching its conclusion on Monday next week, now is an opportune moment to reflect on the past year — a year marked by institutional strain and national resilience. For Taiwan, the Year of the Snake was a composite of political friction, economic momentum, social unease and strategic consolidation. In the political sphere, it was defined less by legislative productivity and more by partisan confrontation. The mass recall movement sought to remove 31 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators following the passage of controversial bills that expanded legislative powers and imposed sweeping budget cuts. While the effort
There is a story in India about a boy called Prahlad who was an ardent worshipper of Lord Narayana, whom his father considered an enemy. His son’s devotion vexed the father to the extent that he asked his sister, Holika, who could not be burned by fire, to sit with the boy in her lap and burn him to death. Prahlad knew about this evil plan, but sat in his aunt’s lap anyway. His faith won, as he remained unscathed by the fire, while his aunt was devoured by the flames. In some small way, Prahlad reminds me of Taiwan
When Hong Kong’s High Court sentenced newspaper owner Jimmy Lai (黎智英) to 20 years in prison this week, officials declared that his “heinous crimes” had long poisoned society and that his punishment represented justice restored. In their telling, Lai is the mastermind of Hong Kong’s unrest — the architect of a vast conspiracy that manipulated an otherwise contented population into defiance. They imply that removing him would lead to the return of stability. It is a politically convenient narrative — and a profoundly false one. Lai did not radicalize Hong Kong. He belonged to the same generation that fled from the Chinese
The top Chinese official in charge of Taiwan policy this week said that Beijing must gain dominance in cross-strait relations and firmly support “patriotic pro-reunification forces” in Taiwan. All Chinese Communist Party (CCP) officials must “firmly grasp the initiative and dominance in cross-strait relations” to advance the “great cause of national reunification across the Taiwan Strait,” Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning (王滬寧) said at the Taiwan Work Conference, China’s annual event outling policies on Taiwan. Wang also reiterated the need to adhere to the “one China principle” and the so-called “1992 consensus,” to support Taiwanese compatriots who firmly support
RSS