This is not a letter from an irate Taiwanese. This is from an incredulous Malaysian on the
logic of Singaporean Foreign Minister George Yeo's (楊榮文) speech at the UN General Assembly. His criticism of Taiwan is unwarranted in light of Singapore's history and the even-handed treatment it received when it broke away from the Malaysian Federation in 1965. Mind you, Singapore willingly joined the federation in the first place because it perceived there to be advantages in being part of a larger nation.
The point is this: When
Singapore joined the federation in 1963, its government effectively reduced itself to a provincial government. I would think that once a state enters into a political union it gives up certain rights, such as the right to secede.
Throughout history, the exercising of this right has been labeled as anything from "rebellion" to "separatism." I can only think of the breakup of Singapore and Malaysia and the former Czechoslovakia as examples of peaceful separation.
In both cases, the parties involved acted like adults. They sat down, talked and arrived at a mutually agreed solution. I believe that had the federal government of the day chosen to do so, it could have forced the union upon Singapore.
This is in stark contrast to the situation in the Taiwan Strait. Here we have one country laying claim to another country. The People's Republic of China (PRC) has never controlled Taiwan in any way or form. The Republic of China on the other hand lost the mainland to the communists, but kept insisting it was the only legitimate ruler of China. This thickheadedness has left Taiwan with a historical burden, and the average Taiwanese knows this.
As the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) grip on power slowly eroded, the natives rightly wished to put things right by doing away with the ROC and navigating their own destiny. What is wrong with that? George Yeo's derision of Taiwanese independence is therefore most unwarranted, shameless and intellectually bankrupt.
Singapore was able to secede from a union it had clamored to join. Taiwan on the other hand is simply maintaining a sovereignty that is not recognized by Singapore or most of the rest of the world.
Mr. Yeo, please don't let your reverence for Greater China blind you to reality. The same goes for you too, [Prime Minister] Lee Hsien Loong (
The modern ROC is no longer synonymous with the KMT, and it is no longer suppressed by KMT nationalist doctrine. It therefore no longer necessarily believes in reunification. More and more people are beginning to realize the existence of their own culture and consciousness.
This nation has developed separately from China. In fact, China owes much of its present prosperity to Taiwanese businessmen, who are investing heavily there. The Taiwanese, on the other hand, have not received a single word of thanks, only the constant threat of invasion or annihilation. China would have all others believe that those businessmen are patriots returning to the motherland.
Instead of swallowing Chinese propaganda and believing that cross-strait tensions are an internal problem, UN members should take the step of providing Taiwan with some political protection against Chinese aggression.
Taiwan is part of the global village, like it or not. Help it break out of its isolation, not trample on its evolution. It is belligerent China that is missing the opportunity to resolve the dispute peacefully.
Y.J. Ho
Tainan
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