While most domestic discussion on the cross-strait relationship has been focused on the summit between US President George W. Bush and Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) on Thursday next week, the "economic and trade forum" between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) this week deserves more attention.
Despite the KMT's explanation that the agenda of the forum will involve only economic issues, the political implications of the forum and the meeting between former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and Hu this Sunday have cast a shadow over the national interest.
The timing of this year's KMT-CCP forum is politically calculated and should be seen as part of Beijing's "divide and conquer" strategy to isolate the administration of President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). It provides Hu with a means of blaming the current cross-strait impasse on Chen when Hu meets Bush.
Despite Washington's call to talk to Chen and his government, Beijing insists on bypassing the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration and dealing only with the pan-blue opposition.
Utilizing Taiwan's domestic politics is the core of Beijing's underhand strategy. However, it is the KMT's willingness to dance to China's tune that reinforces Beijing's capacity to ignore the Chen administration.
It is also clear that Hu will use the example of the KMT-CCP talks to convince his US counterpart that Chen and the DPP are the major obstacles toward cross-strait dialogue.
Beijing's philosophy of "uniting with the lesser enemy to oppose the main enemy" fits with the KMT's goal and Lien's personal desire to open the door to China. Nevertheless, the KMT and Lien's scheme runs the risk of sabotaging the national interest, national security, sovereignty and dignity.
Lien has fallen into Beijing's trap and is a tool in China's game of dividing local political forces. He has assisted in creating an international misperception that cross-strait tensions are primarily the result of Chen's leadership.
The notion of "it's all Chen's fault" created by the pan-blue camp has not only permeated the international community but is also hurting the government's ability to bargain with China.
Furthermore, Beijing's ambiguous "agreements" with Lien and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) last year on the fictitious "1992 consensus" as the basis for the resumption of cross-strait talks have misled the public over China's intentions.
Beijing's wish to exploit Chen's weak leadership explains its pressure on his administration to accept its "one China" principle without responding to the numerous olive branches he has offered.
This also explains why Chen suggested to KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) last week that "he would absolutely respect" the idea of "one China with each side having its own interpretation."
One way to break Beijing's divide-and-conquer strategy is to nourish conflict between the KMT and the CCP. During his earlier meeting with Ma, Chen called on Lien to clarify the so-called "1992 consensus" with Hu.
Since Beijing has stuck to its own interpretation that "one China" means the People's Republic of China and that Taiwan is part of it, there is no room for the Chinese leadership to accept any "consensus" based on "two Chinas" or "one China with different interpretations" as proposed by the KMT.
If the KMT and the CCP agree on "one China" with differing interpretations, then Beijing must say whether it agrees with the "1992 consensus."
It is of utmost importance that members of the international community, especially our friends in the US, are able to decipher Beijing's strategy and demand an equal and peaceful negotiation between China and Taiwan.
Liu Kuan-teh is a political commentator based in Taipei.
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