China's unification tactics are getting increasingly sophisticated. A Ministry of National Defense report revealed that in its desire to achieve unification with Taiwan, China is now targeting the "southern Taiwanese" population using a combination of culture and religion to "improve those people's perspective of China."
The report also pointed out that China was pulling back troops from Dongshan Island, a clear indication that the high-profile military exercises that had been hyped since May were called off. These two pieces of information indicate that China has launched a new strategy in its campaign to unify with Taiwan.
The communist giant is now attempting to get its secondary enemy to destroy its primary enemy. China's greatest enemy is Taiwanese independence, and, at least in the minds of its leaders, democracy and localization are synonymous with independence.
Therefore, its greatest enemies are former president Lee Teng-hui (
For this reason, China originally tried to drive a wedge between the people of Taiwan, and its government. But in 1996, even under the threat of a missile exercise, Lee was elected president, and subsequently in 2000 and 2004, Chen Shui-bian (
Now, China has a new plan in its unification efforts. In the name of cultural and religious integration, it is targeting the people of southern Taiwan, appearing to put aside its belligerent attitude in order to win over their hearts and minds. But as many local officials in the south have pointed out, the consensus is that the future of Taiwan lies in the hands of the majority of Taiwanese people and there is no market for a "Greater China" ideology. If China thinks that by targeting a number of representatives in the south it will be able to makeover its image, then it clearly does not understand the strength of the Taiwan identity among the southern Taiwanese. So, even though China has changed its tactics -- hoping to win over the traditionally "green" and "parochial" southerners -- they are destined to fail.
China's method of luring locals in southern Taiwan over is also useless because the Chinese government still does not understand the true meaning of Taiwan's democracy.
Beijing does not seem to understand that support for unification is dead here. More ridiculously, they seem to believe that pan-green supporters are staunchly pro-independence while pan-blue supporters are staunchly pro-unification.
It is undoubted that a gap between northern and southern Taiwan does exist, as the green camp enjoys strong support in the south, while the blue camp enjoys strong support in the north. But voter support for different political parties are often very different from their positions regarding unification and independence. In fact, we know from past opinion polls that most Taiwanese people desire the maintenance of the status quo in the Taiwan Strait and disagree with China's "one country, two systems" model; while more and more people here consider themselves "Taiwanese," not "Chinese."
Moreover, despite their ideological fighting in the runup to the March presidential election, both the ruling and opposition camps took "loving Taiwan" as the foundation for campaigns. Thus, a local identification has become the mainstream. Voters may support different candidates for various reasons, but their stances regarding unification and independence is not the main factor that affects voting behavior. In other words, supporting Taiwan's democratization and localization is the wish of the majority of Taiwanese people -- except for a group of isolated politicians. Although the Taiwanese people are divided into the green and blue camps during elections, they are actually united when fighting against Chinese hegemony.
To eliminate post-election conflicts, both the ruling and opposition camps have proposed increasing dialogue with each other. The DPP is planning a proposal to resolve issues regarding Taiwan's ethnicity later this month -- with a focus on promoting ethnic diversity and national unity. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) also last month proposed a draft of its new discourse, entitled "a shared local destiny," to strengthen its local identification. Therefore, China's latest united front strategy targeting the southern Taiwanese will never be able to infiltrate and destroy the strong castle of the Taiwanese people's shared destiny.
Thus far, we have been unable to develop positive cross-strait relations and build a win-win situation simply due to China's insistence of annexing Taiwan -- as the former never treats the latter as an equal political entity. No matter how it refines its methods to make them look more attractive, it cannot hide its unificationist ambitions. As such, it is impossible for Beijing to win the Taiwanese people's trust, so its strategies cannot work.
Take China's withdrawal of its military exercise on Dongshan Island for example. If Beijing cannot change its military expansion aimed at Taiwan, the cancelation of a few military exercises is merely an empty gesture, and cross-strait relations will never improve.
The key to improving cross-strait relations lies in whether or not China can treat Taiwan equally, and recognize the country's existence. Notions of eventual unification are an illusion.
Translated by Eddy Chang and Ian Bartholomew
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
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,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS