The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has expended considerable resources to source Taiwanese online influencers willing to collaborate on “united front” propaganda videos and other pro-China multimedia projects, with the intent of influencing Taiwanese and politics.
Beijing must be wondering if it needed to go through all that effort after hearing Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator-at-large Weng Hsiao-ling’s (翁曉玲) statements at the legislature to Presidential Office Secretary-General Pan Men-an (潘孟安).
Why cultivate pro-CCP online influencers when there are already people in positions of power such as Weng doing Beijing’s bidding? Her spouting CCP talking points in the legislature would pay the CCP far more dividends than having to resort to online influencers.
That said, when it is time to go to the polls for next year’s local elections, the Democratic Progressive Party would only need to replay video clips of Weng making her pro-China speeches. The KMT might as well pack its bags and go home.
“If we affirm that the People’s Republic of China [PRC, China] territorial scope includes Taiwan, then what would be wrong about them recovering Taiwan?” Weng asked.
For a legislator-at-large serving in the legislature of the Republic of China to speak such nonsense after taking an oath to uphold and abide by the Constitution, how could she suddenly start repeating political stances held by a hostile state and then ask “what would be wrong” about Taiwan being “recovered” by China?
Such rhetoric and positioning borders on treason. The majority of Taiwanese cannot accept her words, let alone Pan.
The “recovery” being referred to is the belief that Taiwan is a “lost Chinese territory” that the CCP intends to “recover,” yet Taiwan has never been a part of China. It was never “lost” to begin with, so why would it ever need to be “recovered”?
The KMT’s past era of party-state rule emphasized opposing the CCP and recovering the “mainland,” couched in terms of an irrational “restoration” that realistically could never be achieved, as the KMT was defeated in China and exiled to Taiwan. They vowed to counterattack and recover the national territory “occupied” by the CCP. That was considered a dyed-in-the-wool position that could see someone labeled a traitor to Taiwan if they did not support it.
KMT political figures have long claimed in their own party charter that both sides of the Taiwan Strait would be unified. As for how they intend to forcibly marry off Taiwan to China, they want to remain in a twilight zone, adhering to the so-called “1992 consensus,” in which both sides “acknowledge there is one China,” with each side having its own interpretation of what “China” means.
If Wang advocating the selling out of Taiwan were broadcast on the global stage, how would the US not reconsider whether to step in if the nation was claimed to be part of China and the “original” overlord wanted to “recover” it? Why would other countries bother sticking up for us?
With opposition lawmakers voicing such sentiments, our military, who have pledged to protect our national territory, could waver and capitulate to CCP-peddled defeatism. That would seriously impact our national security.
The government needs to swiftly and resoundingly refute such nonsense. The KMT has yet to distance itself from Weng’s absurdities. Does this mean they agree with or implicitly endorse what she is saying?
Chen Wen-ching works in environmental services.
Translated by Tim Smith
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
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 National Development Council (NDC) on Wednesday last week launched a six-month “digital nomad visitor visa” program, the Central News Agency (CNA) reported on Monday. The new visa is for foreign nationals from Taiwan’s list of visa-exempt countries who meet financial eligibility criteria and provide proof of work contracts, but it is not clear how it differs from other visitor visas for nationals of those countries, CNA wrote. The NDC last year said that it hoped to attract 100,000 “digital nomads,” according to the report. Interest in working remotely from abroad has significantly increased in recent years following improvements in
RSS