“Upon being sworn in, I had an epiphany about the significance of accepting responsibility for the 23 million people of Taiwan. Although I have never felt so honored in my life, this is the heaviest responsibility that I have ever shouldered,” President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said in his inaugural speech on May 20.
However, looking at his recent rhetoric and action — or inaction — many have begun to wonder whether he has any inkling of the gravity of his new title.
On Tuesday, in response to media queries on how he would address China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) if the two meet when Chen visits Taiwan later this year, Ma said: “I would address him as Mr Chen and he could address me as Mr Ma. I think that’s the best way.” Ma added that as long as both sides are on equal footing, there should be no reason to believe that the nation’s sovereignty would be slighted.
It is nothing less than shocking to see how easily Ma would compromise himself and his title — an honor bestowed upon him by 7,658,724 voters — to please Beijing.
According to Ma’s logic, his approach is the best way to avoid “controversy.” But if doing so involves giving up one’s official title in one’s own country, what else can Taiwanese expect from the president when he travels abroad?
Ma seems to take pleasure in lecturing others about the Constitution of the Republic of China, saying that it is more important to respect and practice the words of the Constitution than to amend them.
“As the president of the Republic of China, my most solemn duty is to safeguard the Constitution … My top priority is to affirm the authority of the Constitution and show the value of abiding by it,” Ma said during his inauguration.
If Ma meant what he said, then he had better take a look at Chapter 4, Article 35 of the Constitution, as it states that: “The president shall be the head of the State, and shall represent the Republic of China in foreign relations.”
The so-called “1992 consensus,” which the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government so often trumpets as the basis for cross-strait negotiation, should provide Ma with the confidence he needs to use his proper title. The KMT administration insists that Taipei and Beijing have reached a “consensus,” allowing each side of the Strait to have its own definition of “one China.” As such, there should be nothing wrong with Chinese officials referring to Ma as the president of the ROC.
If Ma continues to compromise his role as head of state, we can expect that the ROC flag will be removed from the Presidential Office when Chen visits.
As farmers struggle to cope with floods in southern Taiwan and as ordinary people face rising commodity prices, Ma has remained silent while his supporters defend his lack of involvement, arguing that he is acting in line with the Constitution and that his responsibilities lie with diplomacy and cross-strait relations.
But Ma’s continued silence over the Diaoyutai (釣魚台) islands incident makes a travesty of that proposition, as the escalating conflict has everything to do with diplomacy and protecting national interests.
A president represents a country’s sovereignty. If Ma cannot understand that and if he cannot act in a manner commensurate with his title, then he is unworthy of the position.
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
RSS