In a videoconference with a US think tank a few days ago, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) referred to a poll by the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) that claimed 70 percent of people support an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China. He said this was because the public realizes that none of the six agreements China and Taiwan have reached over the past 10 months sacrificed Taiwan’s sovereignty, and that the government retained the public’s trust. Ma also said there was no question that the “six points” in Chinese President Hu Jintao’s (胡錦濤) New Year speech were a positive development for cross-strait relations, and that the ECFA proposal was based on concrete suggestions in those points.
Ma’s jokey dismissal of concerns that he is selling Taiwan down the river is worlds away from the public’s position on this issue. He has not acknowledged that the “70 percent support” in the MAC poll is inexplicable. He privileges inflated opinion polls over genuine public opinion. Before the MAC poll came out, a media outlet conducted a poll that showed 90 percent of respondents felt the government should explain what an ECFA would entail — and that more than 70 percent did not know what an ECFA meant. A sizable majority of the public thus has no idea why the government is in such a frenzy. That raises doubts about the MAC poll’s credibility.
It is frightening how Ma is connecting the ECFA to Hu’s “six points,” the first of which states that China is committed to “one China” and that China and Taiwan belong to “one China.” Other issues — a comprehensive cross-strait economic agreement, Taiwan’s international participation and a peace agreement — must be handled within a “one China” framework.
Ma said that Hu’s “six points,” which aim to annex Taiwan, were a “positive development” and he has proposed that the ECFA follow on from this “progress.” The ECFA — in the guise of an economic pact — is thus a platform for binding Taiwan to China. Relinquishing Taiwan’s power and humiliating its people while claiming that sovereignty is not being compromised is balderdash. Ma must think the public is easily deceived, or else how would they fall for this ganging up with China to advance unification by economic means?
During Ma’s election campaign, he stressed he was running for the presidency of a sovereign nation, but all actions since his inauguration have aimed at roping Taiwan to China in order to achieve his dream of unification. He has exposed Taiwan to China like a moth to a flame, with no regard for a decaying economy and the tough times the public are experiencing.
Judging from his policy choices, Ma believes the public will accept China out of utter desperation if the economy continues to plummet. According to figures released by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics, unemployment increased again to 5.81 percent last month, while an IMF report stated that unemployment reached 6.3 percent. When graduates enter the picture later this year, these numbers will grow. Tough times may please Ma, because the unemployed may fantasize about the Chinese economy finding them work, and this could increase support for an ECFA.
The use of phony opinion polls makes a farce of democracy. In Ma’s videoconference, he said that Taiwan is a democracy, that no one can sell out Taiwan and that all citizens must decide on its future. But this contradicts his actions: keeping the details of an ECFA secret, not allowing the legislature to monitor any agreement and dismissing calls for a referendum on the matter.
By “all citizens,” then, does Ma mean all 1.3 billion Chinese?
Ma’s rhetoric and trickery have gone largely uncontested for almost a year. Now, he is creating an irreversible trend toward unification using hypnotic slogans that entice the unwary. Once this goal’s foundations, such as an ECFA, are complete, Taiwan will be helpless when dealing with China and there will be no turning back. Look at Hong Kong: Apart from having their economic fantasies shattered, Hong Kong’s residents can’t even elect their own chief executive.
This leads to the key question: Will Taiwanese simply stand around as Ma sells Taiwan to Beijing?
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