During his tour of the US, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
Ma made some correct statements. He voiced his indignation at Beijing, saying that if China continued to oppress Taiwan, it would not only be independence activists who opposed Beijing, but that he would do so too.
He insisted that the "Republic of China" (ROC) is an independent and sovereign state, and that a resolution of cross-strait differences should be sought through dialogue. He sees Taiwan-US relations as even more important than cross-strait relations, and opposes the UN's drive to promote the use of simplified Chinese characters. Ma's arguments, along with his oratorical skills, may make him a much worthier leader of the opposition.
The problem is that Ma's vision of the development of cross-strait relations is distorted by wishful thinking. For example, he still markets the "1992 consensus," which never existed, for China has never departed from its position that there is only one China in the world, that Taiwan is part of China and that the government of the People's Republic of China (PRC) is the only legitimate government of China. Ma must surely be aware that Beijing's idea of a consensus is that Taiwan accepts China's position on the issue, no matter what.
In addition, the PRC has consistently rejected the concepts of "one China, one Taiwan" and "two Chinas." Beijing has also opposed participation in international events organized by the UN by official Taiwanese representatives using a title that may imply national sovereignty. It is unlikely, therefore, that China is going to accept Ma's standpoint of "one China, with each side having its own interpretation."
Ma has also said that China will have to accept one of two titles for Taiwan: either the Republic of China or the Republic of Taiwan. That's fine as a joke, but he can't really mean it, for both titles have been rejected by the PRC since 1971, when the UN recognized the PRC. In the absence of an alternative, would Ma himself be willing to accept the title "Republic of Taiwan"? Considering his recent comments made during a trip to the UK that the KMT continues to frown on Taiwanese independence, the answer is clearly no.
Beijing is not going to make any compromises unless Ma has the guts to announce the KMT would consider Taiwanese independence, effectively using a policy he doesn't agree with as a bargaining chip.
When Ma talks of "one China," he is referring to the ROC, whose territory includes the PRC, Inner Mongolia and Taiwan. This not only goes against international consensus, but also betrays a stubbornness of which dictator Chiang Kai-shek (
It would seem that the new generation of KMT leaders do not have anything new to say, still fantasizing that their David can fell China's Goliath, unaware that they are in constant danger of being flattened.
Ma's trip to the US should have taught him that he still has much to learn about international politics.
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