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.
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is
RSS