That the Chinese-language China Times recently printed a story containing rumors and unsubstantiated claims presented as fact should come as no surprise to people familiar with Taiwan's media.
But the latest example, on Feb. 22, when it quoted "unnamed aides" of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate Ma Ying-jeou (
First, it resulted in Euro News correspondent Sergio Cantone canceling his trip, losing Taiwan the chance for some valuable news exposure in 27 European countries. Second, it helped Ma avoid something that has been conspicuously absent in the buildup to the election -- an independent examination of his policies.
The fact that the interview would only have been broadcast in Europe and that few people here would have paid any attention to it did not seem to bother the Ma camp as it sought to protect their man from genuine scrutiny. But it needn't have worried, because there is already evidence that Ma doesn't hold up well when the questioning gets tough.
Who can forget Ma's famous lapse during his appearance on the BBC's Hardtalk program in February 2006? When driven into a corner by host Stephen Sackur about his belief in "one China" and unification, Ma resorted to patronizing language, accusing his inquisitor of not being "familiar with Chinese and Taiwanese affairs."
Or, on a visit to the Brookings Institution in March 2006, when the then KMT chairman was asked what he intended to do about bridging the political divide in Taiwan and bringing about political reconciliation, Ma -- presumably taken off guard -- proceeded to deliver an unrelated discourse on Taiwan's relations with APEC, much to the bemusement of the 150 or so high-profile guests in attendance.
But Ma is equally fallible when speaking at home, as his wishy-washy, incomplete responses to the promptings of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) rival Frank Hsieh (
This weakness may have also been behind Ma's decision to dodge Hsieh's numerous invitations to hold a real debate, which, contrary to Central Election Commission-organized talking shops, would have given the candidates the opportunity to really question each other and explore one another's presidential platforms.
It is easy to appear competent when one is given an easy ride. But being president of a country -- especially one in such a precarious position as Taiwan -- is not an easy job. It requires a decisive person, capable of making tough decisions.
Ma, who had a privileged upbringing, has never endured real hardship or had to fight for anything in his life, save perhaps the chairmanship of the KMT.
So how do voters know he has got what it takes to defend the nation's sovereignty from the very real internal and external threats it faces if he is elected president? The simple answer is that on the present evidence they don't, and after March 22 it will be too late.
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercises, the largest naval exercise in the region, are aimed at deepening international collaboration and interaction while strengthening tactical capabilities and flexibility in tackling maritime crises. China was invited to participate in RIMPAC in 2014 and 2016, but it was excluded this year. The underlying reason is that Beijing’s ambitions of regional expansion and challenging the international order have raised global concern. The world has made clear its suspicions of China, and its exclusion from RIMPAC this year will bring about a sea change in years to come. The purpose of excluding China is primarily
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
Delegation-level visits between the two countries have become an integral part of transformed relations between India and the US. Therefore, the visit by a bipartisan group of seven US lawmakers, led by US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul to India from June 16 to Thursday last week would have largely gone unnoticed in India and abroad. However, the US delegation’s four-day visit to India assumed huge importance this time, because of the meeting between the US lawmakers and the Dalai Lama. This in turn brings us to the focal question: How and to what extent