Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country.
While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US — like many Mainlander migrants of his generation, he retains a political obsession with a great China.
Despite studying in the US, Ma fails to understand the difference between democracy and dictatorship, and can hardly be a staunch defender of Taiwan’s democracy. Moreover, his lack of apprehension of the tragic history of China — a vicious cycle of a unified country ruled by tyrants and a chaotic society mired by infighting — made him relate more to the Chinese ruling class, instead of the common people. He could neither be a staunch defender of human rights, nor a freedom fighter for Chinese people.
Many academics in the US whose parents migrated with Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) from China to Taiwan share similar political traits. They tend to visit China to connect with the ruling class, enjoy VIP treatment as patriots of China and help report to the outside world the accomplishments of the CCP, despite the human rights contraventions, the mafia-style government administration, and the wicked handling of citizens’ lives and livelihoods.
Even when they visited China in the 1970s at the peak of the Cultural Revolution, they saw no evil, heard no evil and spoke no evil.
The sad truth is that the voices of Chinese students are suppressed. Even recreational activities in huge groups are prohibited. A few months ago, students from Zhengzhou University in Henan Province started holding so-called “Night Rides to Kaifeng,” with students from other universities also participating part. At its peak, more than 200,000 college students rode shared bicycles together. The fleet stretched for dozens of kilometers from Zhengzhou, forming a spectacular scene.
This sparked concern among authorities, who were afraid they might be precursors of protests such as the “blank paper” movement — which opposed the Chinese government’s COVID-19 policies — or worse, and clamped down on activities outside campus.
When a government does not hold the principle of justice for all, it easily treats its citizens as potential enemies. In fact, many killings of government officials have occurred at an alarming rate lately.
Goldman Sachs has estimated that China’s local government debt total more than 94 trillion yuan (US$12.9 trillion), or more than half the size of the economy. Recent reports indicated that more than 10 million college students cannot find a job and have experienced homelessness.
Democracy and freedom are the only path forward to revive the Chinese economy.
Former US president Franklin D. Roosevelt said: “We cannot always build the future for our youth, but we can build our youth for the future.”
Where there is no future for the youth, there is no future for the country.
Chinese students’ longing for freedom of the press and liberty to form opposition parties cannot be overstated. Meanwhile, Taiwanese students want to be free from China’s constant harassment and military threats. Peace, prosperity and progress are what Taiwanese students strive for.
Trust is the currency of international cooperation. Until China removes all its missile arsenal aimed at Taiwan, Ma’s marching on an agenda that would bring the same fate of Chinese students to Taiwanese students would only be totally rejected.
It was well said that: “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” For the sake of the youth — Chinese, Taiwanese or otherwise — Ma should be a staunch fighter for democracy and freedom, and switch to the right side of history.
James J. Y. Hsu is a retired professor of theoretical physics.
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS