Both during his visit to the US and in his meeting with President Chen Shui-bian (
If we agree that there is a Taiwan Strait crisis, then the external factors are Beijing's deployment of missiles threatening Taiwan and its wish to use its "one China" strategy to annex Taiwan. An internal factor is pro-unification propaganda in China-friendly media preventing the Taiwanese people from gaining an understanding of the nature of the regime in Beijing.
Two recent opinion polls have offered surprising results. In one poll, conducted by the Institute for National Policy Research 14 percent of respondents said they agreed that the People's Republic of China was a free and democratic country, while 20 percent answered that they didn't know. Added together, this suggests that one-third of Taiwanese don't know that China is a despotic dictatorship.
Of all the countries in the world, Taiwan should not be unaware of the nature of Communist China. There are no elections there, it is ruled through violence and it has deployed 800 ballistic missiles aimed at Taiwan along its eastern coast. In Taiwan with its press freedom, one-third of the population doesn't know that China is neither free nor democratic? This ignorance is preposterous.
In the other poll conducted by a media outlet after the Chen-Ma meeting, one-third of respondents said Beijing would agree to Ma's "one China, with each side having its own interpretation." This once again shows how many Taiwanese don't have a clue about the nature of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Anyone with a degree of political common sense knows that Beijing would never agree to Ma's "one China" interpretation, because that would mean acknowledging that there are two Chinas. China has never relaxed its interpretation of "one China," so why would it let this policy fall to pieces now?
The public's lack of understanding of China is mainly a result of pro-Chinese reporting in the pro-unification media in recent years, but, although worrying, it is understandable. Ma has joined those who lack this understanding. His statements during his US visit and his meeting with Chen were filled with wishful thinking, but he is deceiving no one but himself with his calls for "one China, with each side having its own interpretation."
Ma has also said that the KMT and the CCP have engaged in contacts over so many years that the KMT is able to get along with the CCP on any issue. I wonder if he understands the shamelessness of this statement. The reason the KMT continually lost out to the CCP and eventually had to flee to Taiwan was that it had no idea of how to deal with the CCP.
Prior to Lien's visit to China last year, he made a big issue of adhering to the non-existent "1992 consensus" and "one China, with each side having its own interpretation." While in China, however, he never even dared to mention the name "Republic of China," never mind "one China, with each side having its own interpretation." Apart from gaining a promise of two pandas during his "negotiations with the CPP," did Lien bring home anything substantive to Taiwan?
The CCP is not a dumb, cuddly panda. Anyone who wants to play word games with the CCP will be used by the party. Anyone who wants to befriend the CCP thinking that it is a sweet little panda must have the IQ of a panda.
Cao Changqing is a freelance journalist.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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