“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.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS