Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) came out with the latest in a long line of twisted policy ideas on Sunday during a visit to Taipei Port.
If one is to believe Ma, then the nation can further relax cross-strait restrictions, allow most of its high-tech and manufacturing operations to relocate to China and somehow increase the amount of container ships leaving the nation's ports.
As always with Ma, there was no substance to go with the sound bite.
But most startling of all is that, time and again, Ma is allowed to come out with such obviously contradictory statements without anybody challenging him.
Just last week, for example, he panned the government for its "rigid dogmatism" on foreign policy and for "inflexibly using the name Taiwan" to apply for WHO and UN membership — organizations that require full statehood as a condition for entry.
Ma's response: Taiwan should use its economic strength to apply for membership of the IMF and World Bank, also organizations that require full statehood.
His suggestion comes at a time when China's relentless pressure means Taiwan is having trouble just staying in organizations as obscure as the World Organization for Animal Health.
No doubt Ma believes that applying for membership to international bodies using the name "Republic of China" (ROC) — while claiming that the ROC is the "real" China, as he did in the US last year — is altogether more viable and less “rigid.”
Ma also recently reiterated his wishy-washy foreign policy and diplomacy ideas when he said he would demand China remove missiles targeting the nation before Taipei and Beijing could resume negotiations or reach a peace accord, adding that Taiwan and China should regard “freedom” and “democracy” as foundation stones for cross-strait dialogue.
As if the bullies in Beijing — who famously turned their guns on their own citizens just 18 years ago — are really going to bow to the demands of a nation that cannot even keep its own military arsenal up to date.
In case Ma wasn’t aware, “freedom” and “democracy” are words that don’t hold much currency in Zhongnanhai.
With demands like that on the table, don’t expect substantial cross-strait dialogue to resume anytime soon should he become president. If Ma sticks to his guns, then the so-called “peace accord” that is central to his cross-strait policy platform would appear to be dead in the water.
Ma left for India and Singapore yesterday, no doubt to once again espouse his paradoxical policy platforms on the international stage — where he knows they will not receive any serious scrutiny.
While in Singapore he will probably laud its government for turning the city-state into an economic success, while overlooking the authoritarian system it used to obtain its achievements, as he did in advance of his visit in an interview with the Straits Times last week. But then, no one should be surprised by a KMT figure extolling the virtues of authoritarianism.
It’s about time his opponents started taking Ma to task over these absurd declarations, because as we saw with his ridiculous dance on “independence being an option” and on the BBC’s Hardtalk last year, Ma’s poise is shielding him from accountability.
The public seem to have trouble penetrating the reflective veneer so carefully created by Ma’s well-crafted photo ops and sanitized interviews.
But if they really tried to look behind the Ma facade, they would discover the biggest contradiction of all: Ma is a “leader” with very few leadership qualities at all.
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing