During a speech on Saturday last week at a discussion forum titled “Resume cross-strait air travel: post-pandemic opportunity,” former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) had criticized him for being pro-China and “selling out” Taiwan.
Paradoxically, instead of reducing reliance on China, the government had increased Taiwan’s dependence on it, Ma said, adding that Taiwanese exports to China last year reached a historic high. This shows that President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration is more pro-China and has “sold out” Taiwan to a greater degree than he had, Ma said.
However, according to a report published last year, relying on trade volume alone is insufficient to demonstrate an increased dependence on China’s economy.
In a Jan. 4 article in the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister paper), I showed that Taiwan’s record exports to China was a side effect of US restrictions on the export of technology to China and supply chains relocating as a result of the trade dispute. China has been forced to purchase large quantities of semiconductor and electronic components from Taiwan.
In other words, far from demonstrating Taiwan’s increased reliance on China, last year’s record exports showed that China needs Taiwan. Data released by the Ministry of Economic Affairs has also poured cold water on Ma’s claim, pointing out that the whole world relies on Taiwanese chips.
Ma also said that the US and European countries are increasingly concerned that a conflict between China and Taiwan could break out within the next six years. Ma sought to pin the blame for this entirely on the shoulders of Tsai, and called on her to return to the so-called “1992 consensus” so that dialogue between Taipei and Beijing could resume.
Ma appears to have forgotten that during his tenure as Mainland Affairs Council deputy minister, he wrote an article for the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) official newspaper Central Daily News, published on Nov. 6, 1992, which contained the following frank admission: “China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS) is well aware that both sides have different formulations for ‘one China’ and that there is no convergence. Despite this, Beijing constantly puts it about that both sides have reached a consensus.”
Ma’s “one China, each side with its own interpretation” formula, which enjoys a sacred status within the KMT, was dashed by former ARATS vice chairman Tang Shubei (唐樹備) when he in 1998 said that the “Taiwan side’s so-called one China formula is unconnected to reality.”
If that were not conclusive enough, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) hammered the final nail in the coffin in a speech on Jan. 2 last year to mark the 40th anniversary of China’s “Message to Compatriots in Taiwan.”
Xi in his “five points” proposed to create a “Taiwanese version of the one country, two systems framework.”
This included a redefinition of the “1992 consensus” to mean that “both sides of the Strait belong to one China and will work jointly to seek national unification on the ‘one China’ principle.”
Not only is there no consensus over the “consensus,” Xi has redefined the mythical meeting of minds as a manifesto for unification with China.
It is utterly baffling why Ma continues to parrot China’s Taiwan Affairs Office propaganda, cherry-pick economic data and distort the truth about the “1992 consensus.”
Why does a former president persist in coordinating with Beijing to sow confusion among the public?
Liou Je-wei is a student at National Taiwan University’s Graduate Institute of Political Science.
Translated by Edward Jones
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level
Swiftly following the conclusion of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) China trip, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office unveiled 10 new policy measures for Taiwan. The measures, covering youth exchanges, agricultural and fishery imports, resumption of certain flights and cultural and media cooperation, appear to offer “incentives” for cross-strait engagement. However, viewed within the political context, their significance lies not in promoting exchanges but in redefining who is qualified to represent Taiwan in dialogue with China. First, the policy statement proposes a “normalized communication mechanism” between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This would shift cross-strait interaction from
RSS