On Aug. 25 Ding Zilin (
The letter opens by thanking Ma for his long-term support over the Tiananmen Square massacre, before changing its tone and moving on to the issue of the KMT's policy regarding China. She says, "In all honesty, for many years now, I have become disillusioned with the KMT, not only because of their defeat in the 2000 presidential elections, but more because of their vacillating cross-strait policy. Former KMT chairman Lien Chan's (
I have known Ding for many years now, and know her to be a gentle and refined person. Therefore, it came as quite a surprise to me when, referring to Lien's trip to China, she resorted to language such as "more than one could take," and "ridiculous." It is quite apparent just how rattled Ding was by the incident.
She offers the following suggestion to the KMT: "A politician, and in fact even a political party, can lose everything except for one thing: It cannot lose the courage to stand up to a stronger power."
Surely, the KMT would do well to take this advice to heart.
On accepting the position of KMT chairman, Ma took on a serious challenge: whether or not to continue on the "Lien Chan route." To this, Ding says, "as far as I can see, there is nothing complicated about cross-strait relations. When it comes down to it, it is a conflict between two systems. If talks are to be held, then everything should be laid out on the negotiating table, not just the three links, and not just fruit and pandas. They need to discuss human rights, they need to discuss political reform and they need to discuss freedom of the press. They certainly cannot limit the negotiations merely to issues that Beijing wants to talk about. On the contrary, the less Beijing wants to discuss a certain issue, the more important it is to broach it, as these issues tend to concern the welfare of the people."
This is no longer a mere suggestion: It is a heart-felt hope, it is sincere advice. However, one does wonder whether the KMT will actually listen.
For a long time now there has been a major blind spot in the way Taiwan has approached the cross-strait issue. It has paid exclusive attention to what the Chinese Communist Party is doing, while entirely ignoring what the Chinese people think about the issue. This shows a lack of understanding of China. In fact, as Ding has pointed out, "a more humane system is sure to take root in China eventually."
The Chinese communists may well represent today's China, but they certainly don't represent tomorrow's. Any Taiwanese politician with foresight should seek out, and listen to, the voice of the Chinese people, which even now is getting louder.
Wang Dan is a member of the Chinese democracy movement, a visiting scholar at Harvard University and a member of the Taipei Society.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS