During last year’s presidential campaign, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), whether speaking to a domestic audience or in Washington to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, discussed “maintaining the ‘status quo.’”
Now that she is president, Tsai continues to talk of this “status quo” and the importance of maintaining it.
Passively accepting such talk is all well and good, but the phrase is meaningless. If it is to have substance, it is important to first explore the nature of that “status quo” and whether it should be maintained.
For example, think of a company that is technologically ahead of the competition and whose performance continues to improve. It is reasonable for that company to talk of wanting to maintain the “status quo,” for it stands to benefit from doing so.
However, a company that is performing worse by the day and is building up losses would be mad to consider maintaining the “status quo” a desirable objective.
During last year’s US presidential election, then-candidate Donald Trump saw what he believed to be the downward trend of his nation’s place in the world. He did not call for maintaining the “status quo,” but instead called for its improvement with the slogan “make America great again.”
As the election results testify, the US electorate agreed with him. “Make America great again,” they said. Note the last two words — they were not shouting: “Keep America as it is.”
To the domestic audience, Taiwan’s “status quo” means corporate interests growing stronger by the day, while people with low salaries have to put up with earning a paltry NT$22,000 per month. Is that the “status quo” that is worth maintaining?
What about the “status quo” of young couples who do not dare enter into marriage, and if they do get married, they do not dare have children?
What about the “status quo” of more than 80 percent of Taiwanese having no faith in the judiciary, or of people flying the national flag of the People’s Republic of China on the streets of Taipei?
What about the “status quo” in which it is difficult to tell where the criminal world ends and the political world begins, or in which military contract scandals hit the headlines thick and fast? Are these representative of the “status quo” that Taiwanese should seek to maintain?
For Tsai’s audience overseas, perhaps the optics of retired generals going to China to attend events speaks of the “status quo” Taiwanese should try to maintain, or the reports of military officers — retired and serving — selling military secrets to China.
Then there are Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, the number of which has fallen from 22 to 20 in the short time since Tsai took office. Is this maintaining the diplomatic “status quo”?
It sure looks like the “status quo” has been altered by outside forces. What good does a “status quo” in which the nation is denied entry to international organizations do for Taiwan, or a “status quo” in which Taiwan is forced to participate in international summits or sporting events under the name “Chinese Taipei,” or in which Taiwan must take part in the WTO under the name “the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu”?
Is the current trajectory of “maintaining the ‘status quo’” going to lead to bigger and better things, or is it going to lead down a dead end, and if the “status quo” is going to be changed, will people stand with Taiwan, whatever the repercussions?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired associate professor at National Hsinchu University of Education and a former deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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