Former president Lee Teng-hui (
In a 2003 symposium entitled "Hong Kong under `one country, two systems,'" organized by Taiwan Advocates, an organization founded by Lee, I was interviewed by a reporter from a Hong Kong-based cable news channel. She asked me how far-reaching Lee's influence was, and what I thought about Lee's pro-Japan attitude.
I said Lee's role as a political figure was not as influential as when he was still president. Given that some who followed Lee did not do so out of idealism but out of personal interest, many turned against him after he stepped down.
Although Lee's followers have diminished in number, those remaining quite fervently pursue his political ideals. And even though Lee is the founder of the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU), it is not appropriate to use results of opinion polls on support for the TSU to indicate the level of Lee's support, since many in the Democratic Progressive Party also support his ideas.
As to the second question, it is hardly surprising that Lee, who was born under Japanese rule, is pro-Japanese. Many Taiwanese who experienced the 228 Incident and other similar incidents of persecution involving the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government, felt that the KMT compared poorly with the Japanese government. These experiences are very different from those of Chinese who suffered the effects of the war with Japan.
I have encountered people who like to chastise Lee for having been a communist in his youth. This, in fact, is nothing to be ashamed of. At the time, a lot of passionate young people joined, or were sympathetic to the Communist Party because it was seen as idealistic.
Great changes have occurred in Taiwan in the 10 years since Lee's previous visit to the US, including the introduction of direct presidential elections and the transfer of government power. These developments are important to democracy in Taiwan and a first for the Chinese world. When the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) reacted to Lee's visit 10 years ago with verbal attacks and military threats, it showed its true militarist and expansionist face. This military threat only served to strengthen Taiwanese self-awareness.
When Lee mentioned the existence of the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan in his speech at Cornell University, he provoked China's irrational fury.
Today, the term ROC is not enough to satisfy Taiwanese who have developed a national identification with Taiwan and strive for the establishment of one country on each side of the Taiwan Strait. This wish is now gaining more and more currency with the US and the world at large.
Lee is a great contemporary Taiwanese politician. Through his vision, he has made a permanent contribution to Taiwan's democracy and its development in becoming a normal country. At a crucial juncture in Taiwan's political development, his rich political and economic experience has allowed him to fulfill the responsibilities of a loyal opposition by proposing principled goals and flexible strategies.
His ability to take a comprehensive view of the whole situation is one of the reasons why he has been so successful throughout his many decades in politics and also why he retains strong influence. If he has been guilty of any mistakes, it was that he believed in a few cheats who only wanted fame and wealth, and that he helped them gain high office.
Lee is a valuable asset for Taiwan and the whole Chinese world. This is demonstrated by the fact that the CCP has labeled him its enemy No. 1. The fact that Lee, having passed 80, still wants to serve the country also highlights the difficult situation that Taiwan finds itself in as a result of indiscriminate pressure placed on it by the Chinese.
During this visit to the US, I hope that he will make Taiwan's voice heard and that he will make suggestions that can bring Taiwan closer to the US and the world.
Paul Lin is a commentator based in New York.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti and Perry Svensson
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
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS