The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has applied for permission for China's Taiwan Affairs Office Director Chen Yunlin (
The KMT has accused the Mainland Affairs Council of obstructing Chen's visit, while council officials say the government has been dealing with the issue according to the law, and that it has not attempted to block Chen from visiting.
According to a report by China's state-run Xinhua news agency last Tuesday, China appealed to Taiwan to let Chen visit thus: "The mainland hoped the Taiwan authorities would permit Chen's delegation to attend the forum" on farm trade in October, Xinhua said, citing a spokesman for the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS).
China may seem eager to have its top official for Taiwan affairs come here, but ARATS is refusing to respond to correspondence on the matter from its Taiwanese counterpart, the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF).
The SEF has sent letters to China three times -- the latest was issued last Friday -- without a peep.
Reports from China have said that if ARATS responds to the SEF, it might mislead outsiders into thinking that cross-strait relations are thawing.
If China does not want cross-strait relations to thaw, then what possible purpose does Chen's visit serve other than to undermine the government and, like a Trojan horse, set up a platform for further corrosion of security?
In April, the KMT held a joint cross-strait economic and trade forum with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in Beijing, at which China offered deals including the lowering of barriers for Taiwan-grown fruit, vegetables and other farm goods, the strengthening of cross-strait financial exchanges, allowing Taiwanese to apply for licenses to practice medicine in China and encouraging Taiwan's service sector to enter the Chinese market.
If China is so eager to "normalize, regularize and stabilize cross-strait economic relations," as Chen himself was quoted as saying during the KMT-CCP forum, then why does Beijing not immediately engage in dialogue with Taipei?
Few oppose cross-strait economic exchanges and trade in principle. But no one should harbor any illusions over the grave potential for sabotage that underlies the liberalization of cross-strait ties.
If the Mainland Affairs Council approves Chen's application, then he will be the most senior Chinese official to visit Taiwan in years.
Indeed, Chen is very welcome to come here and get a taste of what his country lacks. He will be even more welcome if he expresses genuine goodwill.
Overall, however, China continues to treat Taiwan to acts of provocation. It bypasses elected officials, denies the legitimacy of the Democratic Progressive Party administration and holds the democratic mechanism in contempt by talking only with opposition parties.
If Chen's visit is going to be just another cog in the Chinese machinery of manipulation and veiled threats, then he is not welcome. If his appearance at the KMT's forum next month is going to be just another transparent attack on the national interest under the ruse of "benefiting Taiwan's farmers," then he should forget about ever coming here -- so long as this nation harbors any self-respect.
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