Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) continues to imitate Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) political stance by saying that “the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family.”
Lin Fei-fan (林飛帆), one of the student leaders of the 2014 Sunflower movement, said in an op-ed in the British publication The Diplomat: “Ko’s accommodation of Beijing has not assuaged its assertiveness toward Taiwan in any way. Rather, it has given Beijing more leverage to infiltrate Taiwan’s domestic political debates and signaled a reincarnation of the KMT’s [Chinese Nationalist Party] past approach.”
Ko’s Internet army attacked the article, with some even labeling Lin a “pro-Taiwanese independence dog” (台獨狗).
Ko’s opportunistic defense of Taiwan and China being “one family” and “a community of shared destiny” prompted Lin to write: “As a rising political force, Ko’s tendency to embrace ‘one China’ has introduced a complicating factor into Taiwan’s future trajectory... Neglecting the fact that ‘the two sides of the Strait are one family’ serves as a core concept of Beijing which traps Taiwan in an endless cycle of independence-unification debates will not help us to transcend domestic divergence.”
Compared with New Power Party (NPP) Executive Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), a political hypocrite, and NPP Legislator Freddy Lim (林昶佐), who told Ko to “eat shit” for supporting the “one family” claim, but then flip-flopped on the issue, the clear and resolute attitude that Lin — a young Taiwanese of the new era — holds toward Taiwanese identity is quite significant.
Lin not only criticized Ko and slapped the NPP in the face, but also clearly delineated between choosing Taiwan and choosing China in the Nov. 24 nine-in-one municipal elections.
Legislator Pasuya Yao (姚文智), Taipei mayoral candidate for the Democratic Progressive Party, has also demanded to be told the difference between Ko’s “one family” and the KMT’s so-called “1992 consensus.”
Ko brags that he has left a deep “imprint” on the under-30 generation, believing that young people forgive him and support his mistaken position. For this reason, he continues to play the blue-green card to attract young voters dissatisfied with politics and to distinguish himself from President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), who steadfastly refuses to recognize the “1992 consensus,” by supporting Xi’s invasive “one family” stance.
Since bowing to China politically, Ko has won praise from Beijing, as well as China’s political groups and media, but he is shredding Taiwanese values, confusing the national identity and inciting conflict.
Shocking all of Taiwan, the Sunflower movement — civil disobedience that went beyond the blue-green divide — was launched by young Taiwanese against then-president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) pro-China policies and the “1992 consensus” of the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party.
By contrast, Ko has been manipulating opposition between the blue and green camps and their divergence on national identity until he has fallen in line with former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰), People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜), Ma and their “one China” policy.
Lin became the target of a broad offensive by Ko’s Internet army shortly after his article was published, but Ko did not respond until two days later, using his same sly way of answering factual criticism with meaningless responses.
The values of the Sunflower movement are clearly punching holes in Ko’s deceitful “one family” campaign, his way of charming the younger generation.
Chen Tsai-neng is a doctoral student at National Chung Hsing University’s Graduate Institute of International Politics.
Translated by Eddy Chang
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS