Since the beginning of the Sunflower movement, pro-unification media have linked it to the promotion of Taiwanese independence.
In an attempt to shift the focus, they said that the banners and flags hung outside the Legislative Yuan during the demonstrations by pro-independence organizations were put up there by the students.
By doing so, they tried to stir up the unification-independence issue in an attempt to cause a confrontation between the pan-blue and pan-green camps. The student leaders handled the issue with great caution and the media were unable to create any sensational headlines regarding their position on the issue.
Still, the Sunflower movement and pro-independence groups share opposition to the opaque cross-strait service trade agreement, which means that there should be room for cooperation.
In addition, the student-led movement cannot be completely isolated from the unification-independence dispute.
For example, in a speech on March 30, student leader Lin Fei-fan (林飛帆) demanded that Taiwan redefine its relationship with China and refuse unification. The service trade agreement is like a Trojan horse in that it is an attempt to bring about unification through economic means. Refusal to accept unification with China was a core view of the Sunflower movement.
As protesters occupied the legislative chamber during the student-led movement, some protesters who had gathered outside the Legislative Yuan made more radical comments, particularly after the legislative chamber had been cleared.
At a protest organized by the Alliance of Referendum for Taiwan in front of the Legislative Yuan, one student declared on stage that he supported Taiwanese independence and the young listeners around him gave him a round of enthusiastic applause.
Why did something like this suddenly appear in Taiwan? Does President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) not think the so-called “cross-strait reconciliation” is his greatest political achievement?
Is it not true that some members of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) often suggest that the party should follow the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) China policy as a way of attracting votes?
The US praises the Ma administration’s China policy whenever it comments on the political situation in Taiwan. The Chinese government is overjoyed to have such a pro-Chinese man in power who is even willing to consider the same kind of “one country, two systems” policy in Taiwan that it has implemented in Hong Kong. Why is there such a huge gap between politicians’ ideas and public opinion?
Judging from the results of various opinion polls, the percentage of respondents identifying as “Taiwanese” has increased greatly under Ma’s rule.
The fact that they did not vote for the DPP does not mean that they identify with Ma’s pro-China policies, because they are young citizens who to a certain extent lack political awareness and they usually have no means to express their opinions.
However, as the Sunflower movement began, it sparked a national awareness. Taiwanese independence, which has always been ridiculed and opposed by China, is regaining its reputation thanks to Ma’s willful insistence on a pro-unification line and Beijing’s increasing pressure on the president, although this is something that he dares not admit to in public.
There is a difference between opposition to unification with China and support for Taiwanese independence.
Those who oppose unification include people who have an attachment to the Republic of China. Apart from independence advocates, those who oppose unification are equally important because they can further unite those who do not support independence, but refuse to be annexed by the Chinese Communist Party.
Opposition to unification can be seen as a somewhat pro-independence stance and it demonstrates the public’s national awareness.
This is something that independence advocates must accept with an open mind to expand and organize a wide support base. It is only once they achieve this that the US and other countries will be able to squarely face the nation’s independence and sovereignty.
The Sunflower movement and pro-independence groups should respect their mutual differences and retain their similarities.
It was the cooperation between the more moderate groups and the radical groups that was key to the movement’s success, and this is an experience that should be cherished.
They can certainly express their own ideals, but they should not criticize each other lest their opponent use that to destroy their unity.
Paul Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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