Regardless of its impact on the presidential election, the dramatic gesture of kneeling down and kissing the ground, displayed by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
It also clearly reflects how in due course democratization in this country has effectively come to be "Taiwanization." In other words, our politicians are compelled to show to the people that they see this country as their homeland and understand that they should be loyal to it.
This dramatic gesture by Lien and Soong was by no means an emotional and instantaneous response to the unexpected number of pan-blue supporters who participated in the rally.
On the contrary, it was a well-calculated act designed by the pan-blue campaign strategists.
Some leaders in the pan-blue headquarters went so far as to proudly admit that to make the event more surprising and dramatic, the candidates themselves were not informed until the last moment that they would be prostrating themselves and kissing the ground. So in that case, what exactly is this calculation trying to achieve?
To start with, ever since the beginning of the presidential campaign, the pan-blue candidates have met with much criticism over their lack of loyalty to Taiwan. Voters have their doubts about the pan-blue camp's loyalty to this country, mainly because of its upholding of the unificationist agenda.
Moreover, many surveys have indicated that more people believe that President Chen Shui-bian (
Add to this the unexpected success of the 228 Hand-in-Hand Rally, which sent a strong signal to the pan-blue team, and one begins to get a clearer picture. At this historic rally, over 2 million people formed a human chain across the nation to protest China's threats. Not only did the rally demonstrate the mobilization skills of the pan-green team, but the theme of the rally, "Say yes to Taiwan, say no to China!" was highly appealing to many of the non-traditional pan-green supporters.
Quite suddenly, the pan-blue camp seemingly discovered an ironclad fact: While there are still a few people who regard China as their motherland, there are more and more people in Taiwan who see this nation as their one and only homeland.
This also explains why, right after the pan-blue camp's March 13 rally, Lien made the following announcement: "The Republic of China is a sovereign state, which we cannot and will not allow to be swallowed, merged or united with the People's Republic of China."
Soong echoed Lien by saying to the crowd, "Taiwan should not bow to the pressure of the Chinese mainland."
There was also similar talk in Lien's campaign pledges, to the effect that during his term there would be no unification of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait.
Apparently, like it or not, "our group versus their group" and "Taiwan versus China" have gradually become mainstream opinion. And it is this mainstream trend that spells out the pan-blue camp's calculation: The candidates simply have to demonstrate that they love this land and they are answering the calls of the people.
In fact, there is another angle to this turn of events.
Many analysts tend to see the dynamics of Taiwanese politics from a "top-down" perspective. That is, politicians mobilize voters to support their vision and their agendas. However, the 228 Hand-in-Hand Rally and Lien and Soong's theatrical gesturing instead suggest that we may need to take a "bottom-up" view of the politics of this country.
Simply put, it is not so much about how politicians manipulate the people but rather how people might and should dictate to the politicians.
Democracy has pressured politicians into responding without ambiguity and into putting forth their vision for this country, particularly with respect to its current status and its future.
After decades of separation of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, and due in large part to the democratization of Taiwan, this country has developed its own ethnically and politically unique identity. Thus, "one China" has become a myth for the Taiwanese and the "one country, two systems" model simply has no market here.
If the above characterization of recent developments in this country is correct, the message that is being sent across the Taiwan Strait is surely very profound. Leaders in Beijing have repeatedly said that they want to listen to the hearts and minds of the people in Taiwan. But the sad fact for China to face is this: It is slowly but surely losing the hearts and minds of the Taiwanese people.
China's continuing military intimidation and diplomatic isolation can never succeed in winning Taiwan back.
As is becoming more evident, these hawkish positions and heavy-handed policies will only dishearten the people here and drive Taiwan further away.
More importantly, since democratization has resulted in Taiwanization, it naturally follows that any sound Taiwan policy developed by Beijing has to accommodate this fact.
Finally, it is worthwhile to conclude with this question:
Will the US and the international community be prepared to accommodate not only a democratizing Taiwan but also a Taiwanizing democracy?
Lo Chih-cheng is the executive director of the Institute for National Policy Research.
It is almost three years since Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin declared a friendship with “no limits” — weeks before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Since then, they have retreated from such rhetorical enthusiasm. The “no limits” language was quickly dumped, probably at Beijing’s behest. When Putin visited China in May last year, he said that he and his counterpart were “as close as brothers.” Xi more coolly called the Russian president “a good friend and a good neighbor.” China has conspicuously not reciprocated Putin’s description of it as an ally. Yet the partnership
The ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu (孫子) said “know yourself and know your enemy and you will win a hundred battles.” Applied in our times, Taiwanese should know themselves and know the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) so that Taiwan will win a hundred battles and hopefully, deter the CCP. Taiwanese receive information daily about the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) threat from the Ministry of National Defense and news sources. One area that needs better understanding is which forces would the People’s Republic of China (PRC) use to impose martial law and what would be the consequences for living under PRC
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) said that he expects this year to be a year of “peace.” However, this is ironic given the actions of some KMT legislators and politicians. To push forward several amendments, they went against the principles of legislation such as substantive deliberation, and even tried to remove obstacles with violence during the third readings of the bills. Chu says that the KMT represents the public interest, accusing President William Lai (賴清德) and the Democratic Progressive Party of fighting against the opposition. After pushing through the amendments, the KMT caucus demanded that Legislative Speaker
Beijing’s approval of a controversial mega-dam in the lower reaches of the Yarlung Tsangpo River — which flows from Tibet — has ignited widespread debate over its strategic and environmental implications. The project exacerbates the complexities of India-China relations, and underscores Beijing’s push for hydropower dominance and potential weaponization of water against India. India and China are caught in a protracted territorial dispute along the Line of Actual Control. The approval of a dam on a transboundary river adds another layer to an already strained bilateral relationship, making dialogue and trust-building even more challenging, especially given that the two Asian
RSS