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 the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The stocks of rare earth companies soared on Monday following news that the Trump administration had taken a 10 percent stake in Oklahoma mining and magnet company USA Rare Earth Inc. Such is the visible benefit enjoyed by the growing number of firms that count Uncle Sam as a shareholder. Yet recent events surrounding perhaps what is the most well-known state-picked champion, Intel Corp, exposed a major unseen cost of the federal government’s unprecedented intervention in private business: the distortion of capital markets that have underpinned US growth and innovation since its founding. Prior to Intel’s Jan. 22 call with analysts
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
International debate on Taiwan is obsessed with “invasion countdowns,” framing the cross-strait crisis as a matter of military timetables and political opportunity. However, the seismic political tremors surrounding Central Military Commission (CMC) vice chairman Zhang Youxia (張又俠) suggested that Washington and Taipei are watching the wrong clock. Beijing is constrained not by a lack of capability, but by an acute fear of regime-threatening military failure. The reported sidelining of Zhang — a combat veteran in a largely unbloodied force and long-time loyalist of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — followed a year of purges within the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA)
RSS