Since Beijing passed the "Anti-Secession" Law last month, the cross-strait mood has become increasingly bizarre. Despite repeated warnings from the government, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
By ignoring the government, Lien has compelled President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to consider cooperating with the People First Party (PFP) and endorse a meeting between Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) and PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) early next month.
This strategy suggests Chen is attempting to lift Soong's status to undermine Lien and delegitimize anything he might achieve in Beijing.
So, even as two of the nation's most senior politicians prepare to cross the Strait, disputes between political parties are deteriorating into a sharper conflict.
The political parties involved have their own agendas, and plenty of dirty tricks have been used to get the upper hand.
But the KMT's decision to join forces with Beijing to derail DPP policy is both arrogant and short-sighted. Chen cannot afford to sit back and do nothing.
However, the tacit understanding between the DPP and the PFP to undermine Lien is not necessarily a good thing. Their actions may only serve to push Lien further into China's embrace, and will do nothing to make the KMT respect Taiwan or understand the need to oppose the Chinese Communist Party.
We should also bear in mind that the PFP is in total agreement with the KMT in regard to unification. How will Chen be able to face the people if Soong, in his talks in Beijing, says things that diverge from DPP policy?
In dealing with matters relating to national development and security such as cross-strait policies, it is inappropriate for the government to use short-term tactics to achieve political goals. It is far more important to build a consensus among the major parties, which is the reason why this newspaper has rebuked Lien so harshly for going it alone.
The major political parties must understand the importance of consensus-based action, otherwise it will be the Taiwanese people who will pay a heavy price for endless political squabbling.
Before Lien and Soong visit Beijing, it is crucial that the leaders of the three main parties hold a summit on national affairs.
Only if some level of consensus is reached will the KMT and PFP chairmen be able to engage in substantive negotiations with Beijing.
Otherwise, if cross-strait talks take place against a background of vicious inter-party strife, they will only lead to further political division and worsening confrontation.
To ensure that the Taiwanese people emerge as victors from these talks, the two party chairmen should demand legislators push through the long-delayed arms-procurement bill before arriving in China. We all know that peace is built on security, so Taiwan should first secure its position before entering into talks with China. Only then will the talks hold any meaning.
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 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,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS