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.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
A report by the US-based Jamestown Foundation on Tuesday last week warned that China is operating illegal oil drilling inside Taiwan’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off the Taiwan-controlled Pratas Island (Dongsha, 東沙群島), marking a sharp escalation in Beijing’s “gray zone” tactics. The report said that, starting in July, state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp installed 12 permanent or semi-permanent oil rig structures and dozens of associated ships deep inside Taiwan’s EEZ about 48km from the restricted waters of Pratas Island in the northeast of the South China Sea, islands that are home to a Taiwanese garrison. The rigs not only typify
RSS