Wang Hung-wei’s true voice
On May 2, Taipei City Councilor and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Culture and Communications Committee deputy chairwoman Wang Hung-wei (王鴻薇) was invited to a China Central Television (CCTV) political talk show, during which she discussed President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) second term starting on May 20, and the triangular relationship among Taiwan, US and China.
On the show, Wang referred to Tsai as “leader” and US President Donald Trump as telangpu (特朗普), the Mandarin transliteration of Trump’s name used in China, instead of chuanpu (川普), which is used in Taiwan.
She criticized the US for using Taiwan as a pawn, while Tsai obediently follows Washington’s orders, relying heavily on the US economically and for its international position.
She argued that the US has never publicly pledged to support Taiwan all the way if a war really broke out in the Taiwan Strait.
Wang trashed Tsai as if she were worthless, and she also looked at the Taiwan-US partnership as an exchange of interests.
She even claimed that Tsai takes orders from Washington just to upset Beijing.
If they did not know her, most Taiwanese would think that these remarks had been made by a Chinese journalist or government representative.
Astonishingly, these words came from the mouth of a Taipei city councilor from the KMT.
Taiwan and the US have always been friends, and it is legitimate for two free democracies to cooperate with or assist each other.
The advanced weapons Taiwan purchases from the US and other nations are not part of an “arms race” with China. Rather, these arms procurements are made in order to safeguard the nation and its people, and the pan-blue and pan-green camps adopt the same attitude when they are in power.
Wang’s harsh criticism clearly lacked sincerity and magnanimity.
China has constantly threatened Taiwan in writing and through saber-rattling, making every effort to foment cross-strait confrontation.
As Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) dictatorship belittles Taiwan, has Wang demanded that China respect Taiwan’s sovereignty and public opinion? If she does not speak fairly, she might fall short of her voters’ expectation.
Chen Ho-wen
Taipei
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
On May 13, the Legislative Yuan passed an amendment to Article 6 of the Nuclear Reactor Facilities Regulation Act (核子反應器設施管制法) that would extend the life of nuclear reactors from 40 to 60 years, thereby providing a legal basis for the extension or reactivation of nuclear power plants. On May 20, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislators used their numerical advantage to pass the TPP caucus’ proposal for a public referendum that would determine whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should resume operations, provided it is deemed safe by the authorities. The Central Election Commission (CEC) has
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS