A feeling of dread is enveloping Taiwan today as the public awaits this afternoon’s get-together at Singapore’s Shangri-La Hotel between President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平).
While the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and foreign pundits have waxed rhapsodical about the historical significance of the meeting, many Taiwanese have been far less sanguine, given the decades of lies, broken promises and twisted semantics that the two men represent on behalf of their governments.
The bumps in the road were clear even before Ma’s departure for the city-state, the latest being yesterday’s revelation that China has demanded recognition of its “one China” framework during the meeting.
However, Ma did himself no favors in his news conference at the Presidential Office on Thursday, with his convoluted explanation of how the meeting would not constitute him breaking a campaign promise made in 2011 not to meet with China’s leader if re-elected. His defense sounded as implausible as former US president Bill Clinton’s efforts to redefine sexual relations during a 1998 deposition.
He then sounded downright peevish when asked about Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) comment that today’s meeting would hurt Taiwan’s democracy, saying: “I have never understood what she is talking about. Where have I hurt Taiwan’s democracy?”
Many Taiwanese have never understood how Ma can proclaim that he seeks openness and transparency and is willing to communicate with dissenting voices, when his entire presidency has been built on doing the opposite. He has been unable, despite two stints as KMT chairman, to bring about oft-promised reforms of the party to make it more democratic, while his administration has spent seven years listening only to its supporters and shutting out critics.
The government’s position that announcing the meeting just a few days before it was scheduled to take place constituted informing the public is as absurd as its claim that the premier, Presidential Office secretary-general and the Mainland Affairs Council minister meeting with lawmakers behind closed doors on Wednesday to brief them on Ma’s Singapore trip constituted adequate legislative oversight.
How can Taiwanese trust a leader and government that promise that no backroom deals have been made for the meeting and that no political negotiations are to be conducted or any agreement signed, when the main plank underpinning their cross-strait policy is the so-called “1992 consensus,” a formulation that has been labeled as false by key players in the October 1992 talks in Hong Kong, and a term that was never heard of until eight years after those talks.
The KMT’s talk of “agreements” made at its meetings with the Chinese Communist Party as somehow being the same as government policy is also garbage.
It is exactly this kind of back-dating trickery that makes so many people nervous. Who can trust what Ma — or Xi — says later today, or in the days to come, when experience has shown that years from now they could claim something entirely different?
Beijing has a track record of playing fast and loose with treaties; just ask the Tibetans or Hong Kongers.
The fact that all the previous cross-strait meetings and negotiations have been carefully choreographed and stage-managed, with the issues and agendas clearly set, shows why there are and should be so many questions about the Singapore meeting.
Taiwanese do not feel they can trust Ma to, in his own words, “tell Mr Xi Taiwan’s current situation, so that he can better understand” it when formulating cross-strait policies, because Ma’s government has shown that it is completely out of touch with the nation’s “current situation,” especially with regards to China and cross-strait relations.
If Ma was really determined to ensure the welfare and happiness of future generations of Taiwanese, he would not be rushing off to Singapore.
South China Sea exercises in July by two United States Navy nuclear-powered aircraft carriers reminds that Taiwan’s history since mid-1950, and as a free nation, is intertwined with that of the aircraft carrier. Eventually Taiwan will host aircraft carriers, either those built under its democratic government or those imposed on its territory by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN). By September 1944, a lack of sufficient carrier airpower and land-based airpower persuaded US Army and Navy leaders to forgo an invasion to wrest Taiwan from Japanese control, thereby sparing Taiwanese considerable wartime destruction. But two
This year, India and Taiwan can look back on 25 years of so-called unofficial ties. This provides an occasion to ponder over how they can deepen collaboration and strengthen their relations. This reflection must be free from excitement and agitation caused by the ongoing China-US great power jostling as well as China’s aggressive actions against many of its neighbors, including India. It must be based on long-term trends in bilateral engagement. To begin with, India and Taiwan, thus far, have had relations constituted by various activities, but what needs to be thought about now is whether they can transform their ties
As Taiwan is engulfed in worries about Chinese infiltration, news reports have revealed that power inverters made by China’s Huawei Technologies Co are used in the solar panels on the top of the Legislative Yuan’s Zhenjiang House (鎮江會館) on Zhenjiang Street in Taipei. However, what is even more worrying is that Taiwan’s new national electronic identification card (eID) has been subcontracted to the French security firm and eID maker Idemia, which has not only cooperated with the Chinese Public Security Bureau to manufacture eIDs in China, but also makes the new identification cards being issued in Hong Kong. There might be more
All lives eventually come to an end. Over the years, my friendship with former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) had its ups and downs. Lee’s passing was a heavy blow and has left me deeply saddened. We experienced a lot together and the memories have come flooding back. Lee was born several months earlier than me. During World War II, he was studying at Kyoto Imperial University, but halfway through his studies, he was forced to change his name and enter military service. I was studying at Tokyo Imperial University, but went into hiding to avoid military service, and I was later