If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, White House security advisers will eventually come to believe it. So it is with the stubborn myth of the "1992 consensus" between Taiwan and China, which now has the distinction of tricking Stephen Hadley, national security adviser to US President George W. Bush, into thinking that it ever existed.
Discussing a telephone conversation between Bush and Chinese President Hu Jintao (
The problem with this, of course, is that no such basis has ever been accepted by Taiwan's government, and any hope of a true consensus -- formalizing the idea of "one China," but with different interpretations -- was overwhelmed by former president Lee Teng-hui's (
The "1992 consensus" has new impetus today partly because of its utility for the incoming administration of president-elect Ma Ying-jeou (
In 2006, Lee repudiated the term "1992 consensus," and in so doing it emerged that the term was manufactured by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) think tank guru and former legislator Su Chi (
These days, it seems, fiction has a role to play in cross-strait affairs if it fits the template of peaceful deference to Chinese sensibilities.
For Hadley's benefit, it should be said that Su is no stranger to creative tweaking of reality. He had a role to play in the dissemination to the US Congress of the Bulletgate leaflet composed by KMT think tank members. This ham-fisted propaganda campaign meant to serve as a framework for the pan-blue-camp fantasy that the assassination attempt on Chen and the vice president on the eve of the 2004 presidential election was staged.
Then there were his allegations in late 2005 that the Taipei Times was being manipulated by the DPP government -- a laughable insult for which no evidence was presented.
At the time this all seemed more hilarious than offensive. But with Su in the running for secretary-general of the National Security Council, things are not so funny anymore.
Whether in the habit of slandering media outlets that oppose his ideology, fabricating the diplomatic record or actively eroding confidence in the nation's prosecutors and police, one must ask whether a politician who can hypnotize people with such bunkum -- at home and abroad -- should be allowed anywhere near an institution that is charged with monitoring the security of a free country.
Then one must ask what comes next if that person actually gets the job.
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry gives it a strategic advantage, but that advantage would be threatened as the US seeks to end Taiwan’s monopoly in the industry and as China grows more assertive, analysts said at a security dialogue last week. While the semiconductor industry is Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” its dominance has been seen by some in the US as “a monopoly,” South Korea’s Sungkyunkwan University academic Kwon Seok-joon said at an event held by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In addition, Taiwan lacks sufficient energy sources and is vulnerable to natural disasters and geopolitical threats from China, he said.
After reading the article by Hideki Nagayama [English version on same page] published in the Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) on Wednesday, I decided to write this article in hopes of ever so slightly easing my depression. In August, I visited the National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, to attend a seminar. While there, I had the chance to look at the museum’s collections. I felt extreme annoyance at seeing that the museum had classified Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities. I kept thinking about how I could make this known, but after returning
What value does the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hold in Taiwan? One might say that it is to defend — or at the very least, maintain — truly “blue” qualities. To be truly “blue” — without impurities, rejecting any “red” influence — is to uphold the ideology consistent with that on which the Republic of China (ROC) was established. The KMT would likely not object to this notion. However, if the current generation of KMT political elites do not understand what it means to be “blue” — or even light blue — their knowledge and bravery are far too lacking
Taipei’s population is estimated to drop below 2.5 million by the end of this month — the only city among the nation’s six special municipalities that has more people moving out than moving in this year. A city that is classified as a special municipality can have three deputy mayors if it has a population of more than 2.5 million people, Article 55 of the Local Government Act (地方制度法) states. To counter the capital’s shrinking population, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) held a cross-departmental population policy committee meeting on Wednesday last week to discuss possible solutions. According to Taipei City Government data, Taipei’s