Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) attendance at the Delphi Economic Forum in Greece last week sparked a controversy, not only because he was belittled by being referred to as the “Former Leader of Taipei,” but also for his denial that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC) are two separate entities. The incident shows that politicians who bow to Beijing’s “one China” principle puts their, and their country’s, dignity on the line.
The series of events that led to Ma being adorned with the ludicrous title began with his invitation to the forum, whose Web site initially labeled him the “former president of Taipei.” After Taiwan’s representative office in Greece protested to the event’s organizers, the title was corrected as the “former president of Taiwan.”
However, on Wednesday last week, the organizers endowed Ma with the meaningless appellation “Former Leader of Taipei.” Still, the organizers must have been unhappy that the title, as silly as it was, hinted that Ma, a Taiwanese politician, was the “leader” of “Taipei.” They moved to rid his title of any sign of Taiwanese sovereignty, and decided on “former president of the Kuomintang party-Chinese Taipei.”
They also left his biography blank, with a notice saying: “Coming soon.”
The incident was obviously caused by interference from China, which has consistently hindered Taiwan’s participation in international events.
Ironically, it came only weeks after Ma visited China, where he trumpeted Beijing’s “one China” principle. His compromise apparently did not earn him any favors with the Chinese Communist Party.
However, at the forum, Ma did not criticize China for trying to limit Taiwan’s international exchanges, nor did he mention Beijing’s incessant military drills. Instead, he said that Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) statement that “the ROC in Taiwan and the PRC are two separate entities that exist independently of each other” contravenes the ROC Constitution.
He also rehashed the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) fantasy that Taiwan and China belong to “one China,” and called on Tsai to engage in dialogue with China to avoid a war and achieve peace, as if it were not Beijing that had cut communication channels in the first place.
Ma distorted the cross-strait “status quo” — that Taiwan and China are separate states not subordinate to each other — in front of an international audience at a time when Taiwan is facing increased threats from China, only to pander to Beijing.
His criticism of Tsai was actually a slap to his own face: During his presidential term, Ma and his administration have said that Taiwan is “an independent sovereign country,” and “the two sides of the Strait have no jurisdiction over each other.”
His latest remarks are clearly a ploy to aid the KMT in next year’s presidential election. Ma at the forum parroted the KMT’s catchprase that the election would be a choice between “war and peace,” similar to China’s insistence on “peaceful unification,” but without renouncing the use of force.
China’s ambition to take over Taiwan has increased Taiwanese’s resentment toward Beijing. More people in Taiwan now consider themselves Taiwanese, rather than Chinese. Surveys have shown that more than 80 percent of Taiwanese reject the “one China” principle. Two recent surveys showed that only about 35 percent of the respondents held positive views about Ma’s trip to China, while more than 60 percent were satisfied with Tsai’s stopover in the US early last month. Even a poll released by pro-KMT media showed that 27 percent of voters support the DPP’s cross-strait policy, higher than the 26 percent who support the KMT’s policy.
Those facts should serve as a warning that it is not worth sacrificing one’s dignity and self-identity just to pander to China.
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS