With less than a month left in President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) presidency, it is worth remembering that after the Jan. 16 presidential and legislative elections, Ma said he would work hard to satisfy the public’s needs until his final day as president.
However, as his term nears its end, Ma’s attention is riveted on securing a place for himself in history. Everything he has done — from his own remarks and actions to the measures taken by his administration — shows that he cares more about self-aggrandizement and pleasing Beijing than meeting the needs of the public.
This is further evidenced by an interview Ma did with the Singaporean newspaper Straits Times, which was published on Thursday last week.
In the interview, the president addresses a variety of subjects. Although he elaborated on several issues, the interview is fraught with intentional ambiguity and deliberate misunderstandings. Throughout the interview, Ma dodged questions or gave irrelevant answers. He also appeared self-congratulatory and allowed himself to diverge from the truth by misrepresenting Taiwanese mainstream public opinion, and at a certain point he even tried — unfairly — to speak for Beijing, which no national leader with a sense of dignity and integrity would do.
For anyone who wants to understand how Ma has become one of the nation’s most detested politicians, despite his extreme popularity eight years ago, this interview is a must-read.
When asked how his policies have benefited the public with regard to its top concern — the economy — Ma said that bringing about economic prosperity was one of his goals when running for president.
“We encountered three major economic downturns over the past eight years. So our economic growth was not as good as expected. Other nations are having a difficult time too. So despite the difficulties, we still try to forge ahead. In terms of international ranking, Taiwan has been doing quite well,” Ma said.
However, is that true?
Ma’s bragging might not stand up to scrutiny. According to a CIA report on last year’s global economic performance, out of 225 nations and territories, Taiwan ranked 136th with real GDP growth of 2.2 percent — placing it last among the “Four Asian Tigers” and behind India, the Philippines, Vietnam, as well as many other countries in the region.
And this is only in regard to Taiwan’s standing in the global economy, not to mention Ma’s laughable “6-3-3” campaign pledge — that he would boost annual economic growth to 6 percent, reduce the unemployment rate to 3 percent and increase the annual per capita income to US$30,000 — or that Taiwan’s economic growth has slowed down significantly since Ma replaced former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).
What is unique about Ma is the way in which he so often teams up with Beijing at the expense of his compatriots — sometimes even trying to teach Taiwanese a lesson for not siding with China.
On the public outcry over Beijing’s attempts to exclude Taiwan from the international community, Ma said: “Of course, there are some disputes regarding how Beijing handles such problems.”
And when the interviewer mentioned that there are Taiwanese who support independence, Ma said: “I think you might have some misunderstanding regarding Taiwanese public opinion.”
He added that the pursuit of Taiwanese independence was to “take an irrational attitude toward China.”
On the other hand, he praised China for toning down its verbal threats and desisting from saber-rattling during the presidential election and for adopting other methods instead.
“We also see great progress from their side in showing respect for us,” Ma said, adding that: “China has started to show greater respect for a democratic society.”
As compliant as he is toward Beijing, Ma again defended the so-called “1992 consensus” — and did so awkwardly.
The “1992 consensus” is a term former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislator Su Chi (蘇起) admitted making up in 2000 when he was head of the Mainland Affairs Council. It refers to a tacit understanding between the KMT and the Chinese government that both sides of the Taiwan Strait acknowledge that there is “one China,” with each side having its own interpretation of what “China” means.
According to Ma, the “1992 consensus” was proposed by the Taiwanese side and China accepted it later.
“If we do not even accept the things that we propose, then of course people would criticize our approach,” Ma said in the interview.
The term “1992 consensus,” made up by Su, has somehow turned into something “the public” wants. Who exactly is “the public”? People who were involved in the cross-strait negotiations in 1992 all confirmed that no consensus was reached at the time.
This is typical of Ma’s mentality. In the recent Kenya incident, what happened was that China broke its mutual legal assistance agreement with Taiwan and had Taiwanese fraud suspects deported to China without informing or negotiating with Taiwan.
Nonetheless, Ma insists that Taiwanese are wrong to think that the deportations had anything to do with Taiwan’s sovereignty. According to his reasoning, if Beijing were to undermine Taiwan’s sovereignty, it could simply take all cases into its own hands without negotiating with Taipei at all. How sweet and considerate Ma is toward China.
No wonder the interviewer asked him: “How do you feel about being more popular among mainlanders than among Taiwanese?”
The way people speak betrays their thoughts. Throughout the interview, Ma said more than once that “my term expires on May 19.” Ma seemed to feel a need to reiterate it. His repeated emphasis suggests his reluctance to lose power, as well as his desire to see his successor fail.
He said this exclusively when asked about threats from China and rising tensions across the Taiwan Strait. What Ma really meant was, let us wait and see what happens if the next president deviates from the “1992 consensus.”
Ma also showed the same attitude when answering several other important questions, such as: why Taiwanese are not happy with his cross-strait policies; why the presidential and legislative elections turned out to be a vote of no confidence for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT); whether the KMT is ready to reform itself; and how would he help the KMT?
None of these questions were really answered. Ma either gave a vague, broad answer, danced around the issue or simply ignored the question.
Self-complacency was another defining trait of Ma that the interview exposed.
His arrogant remarks include: “Actually a large number of Taiwanese support our approach [to cross-strait relations]; since I took office, the number of tourists to Kaohsiung increased five-fold; the reason that, starting from 2009, we could participate in the World Health Assembly was because during my term in office both sides of the Taiwan Strait reached a very important political foundation, which is the ‘1992 consensus’”
A political leader should receive compliments from other people, but Ma has been going around bragging about his “political achievements,” which is again typical of him.
The interview with the Singaporean newspaper has fully exposed Ma’s mentality. Seeing that, Taiwanese should no longer expect Ma to be graceful in his last days in office. Many Taiwanese can only hope that he stops causing problems and be a good caretaker.
Translated by Yu-an Tu
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS