To put the agreement between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese authorities into perspective, just imagine that George McGovern, the Democratic challenger to US president Richard Nixon in 1972, had -- to boost his electoral chances -- flown off to Moscow and concluded a 10-point agreement with the Soviet Union. That the US would have been in uproar and McGovern accused of treason is a foregone conclusion. The real question, perhaps, is would he ever have dared return to the US, and how long would he have lived if he had?
Suffice it to say that not only did this never happen but it could not have happened since Americans, whatever their political stripe, have a rugged sense of their own national interest, even if they disagree among themselves as to how this should be pursued.
Can the same be said for Taiwan? Apparently not.
Amid all the outrage over Chiang Pin-kun's (
During Chen's first term there were very frequent trips to China by KMT apparatchiks and lawmakers. Chinese academics -- many of whom double as security personnel, by the way -- were quite frank about the message these visits were supposed to convey: Namely that Beijing should ignore Chen, thereby reducing him to a lame duck, and help the KMT back into power, after which serious negotiations could be opened. When Taiwan's public got wind of these dubious dealings, the reaction was to lose trust in the KMT, and this lack of trust cost the pan-blue ticket the election in March last year.
Were the KMT capable of introspection, it would realize this and understand that its way back into the good graces of the Taiwanese electorate should be to take a principled stand on the issue of Taiwan's status and China's threats. Instead, perhaps as a result of the DPP's inept legislative election campaign last autumn, which gave the false impression that KMT ideology still had value in Taiwan's electoral market, the KMT has continued to pursue narrowly defined party interests -- recovering power at any cost -- with the abetment of Beijing, to the detriment of broadly defined national ones: national sovereignty, dignity and self-determination.
Given the recent passage of Beijing's "Anti-Secession" Law, Chiang's trip was outrageous. Coming as it did on the heels of last Saturday's massive protests, it was a slap in the face for any Taiwanese of any political color who wants to maintain those liberties that China seeks to crush. But note that this is not anything new, it is simply a continuation of post-2000 KMT practice.
The question that has to be answered now is the degree to which the KMT's behavior is criminal. Any right-thinking person knows it to be contemptible. But is it illegal?
Certainly China's 10-point agreement seems to be in violation of the law, as Mainland Affairs Council Vice Chairman Chiu Tai-san (
And is the KMT itself a subversive organization in collusion with an enemy? It is about time that the highest security organs of the state launched a thorough investigation. The KMT has obviously gone too far; we need to know just how far that is.
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