The point of entering government and politics is to establish a political domain. Achieving the goal of political office involves more than just courting votes — one must follow mainstream public opinion, which means altering one’s political positions when necessary.
However, political movements are different. They have fixed political positions and rarely align entirely with mainstream public opinion. This is what makes political movements essential.
The Republic of China (ROC) that occupied Taiwan after World War II was a foreign autocratic regime. Under this regime, Taiwanese were politically discriminated against because of where they were born. This gave rise to the democratization movement.
However, confronting a foreign power gave rise to a different movement — the Taiwanese independence movement.
However, the fact that both of these movements — Taiwanese independence and Taiwanese civil rights — were promoted by the same constituency, gave rise to the mistaken belief that they are one and the same.
The democratization movement aimed for citizens to become the masters of their destiny and form their government through a democratic process.
The Taiwanese independence movement hoped to expel the foreign presence of the ROC government.
Both of these are challenging tasks. Writer and vocal critic of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Henry Liu (劉宜良) was assassinated in a house fire in the US in 1984. As a result, his family could no longer carry on the movement.
Former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) then brought Taiwan from a dictatorship to a democracy.
In the 1990s, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) began participating in the ROC government system, forming the first DPP government in 2000.
The party transformed from a political movement into an organization seeking to become a party of government, doing so by upholding the ROC and falling in line with public opinion.
The Taiwanese independence movement remains a political movement, but its goal has shifted from expelling the ROC to advocating for constitutional reform and renaming the country.
The DPP and the Taiwanese independence movement have taken different paths. As both sides have gone their separate ways, no one can label the DPP as being pro-independence.
However, some members of the Taiwanese independence movement have overly tenacious personalities with a talent for finding resources, similar to cockroaches.
They constantly fly the banner of Taiwanese independence and latch onto the DPP, making it difficult for outsiders to differentiate between the two. As a result, the DPP has been stained by the Taiwanese independence movement, leading the Chinese Communist Party to accuse the ROC and the DPP of being pro-independence.
Those pro-independence cockroaches have tainted Taiwan’s political environment.
Chen Mao-hsiung is a retired National Sun Yat-sen University professor and chairman of the Society for the Promotion of Taiwanese Security.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
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
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
RSS