President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has said he hopes that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Youth League can produce a person like Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤). In saying this, Ma is himself becoming increasingly similar to Hu. In terms of anti-democratic and anti-Japanese sentiment and singing praises for communist autocracy, Ma and Hu are now almost comrades who dance to the same tune.
On the Diaoyutai (釣魚台) issue, Hu permitted angry youths in China to express anti-Japanese sentiment to demonstrate the importance China places on issues of sovereignty.
But Hu is playing politics — the Diaoyutai islets are only 4km² in size. If China holds sovereignty in high regard, why would it sign an agreement with Moscow to waive its claim to land that was taken away by Russia to the equivalent of 360,000 Diaoyutais?
The same goes for Ma. If the KMT considers sovereignty to be important, why does it not pursue the 9.6 million square kilometers of territory that belonged to the Republic of China that is under communist control?
Ma’s approval of anti-Japanese sentiment is also a game aimed at diverting attention from the fact that his inauguration was closely followed by a huge drop in the stock market, hikes in oil, gaffes by his appointees and a manifest lack of political ability.
In his annual comments on the Tiananmen Square Massacre, Ma praised China’s rescue efforts after the Sichuan earthquake.
What does the earthquake have to do with Tiananmen? The massacre was mass murder.
Besides, in the crucial 72 hours that followed the earthquake, Hu’s government refused assistance that was offered by other countries, including Taiwan. It is difficult to ascertain just how many people lost their lives under rubble because of the delay in assistance. Still, this is another form of murder. Disregard for life because of ideology is the most sinful act of an autocratic power. But Ma lacked the sense to take this into account.
Even more outrageous is the fact that Ma once won the admiration of Chinese democracy activists for condemning the massacre. Immediately after his inauguration, however, Ma said nothing of substance.
Some Chinese writers were outraged and this is perfectly understandable. Beijing-based author Liu Zili (劉自立) decried Ma’s fawning over Beijing and said his stance on the Tiananmen Square Massacre as debauched.
Liao Tien-chi (廖天琪), the editor of Observer (觀察), a magazine published by the China Information Center, said that Ma’s praise for China made his blood boil. A Mainlander who grew up in Taiwan, Liao wrote that it was pitiful for the Taiwanese people to have given their fate over to someone like Ma, and that Ma’s speech on the anniversary of the massacre made him feel as if Taiwanese needed an elegy to lament their new president.
Pu Ta-chung (卜大中), chief writer at the Chinese-language Apple Daily, offered up more severe language. He said Ma’s address on the anniversary of Tiananmen substituted the earthquake for the issues of democracy and human rights, in what amounted to a sleight of hand.
On Ma’s praise for media liberalization in China, Pu retorted that the government should not be intervening in the media in the first place, so “liberalization” shouldn’t be an issue; praise for “liberalization” was thus worthless. Pu likened the situation to a criminal who is praised for merely raping when he is accustomed to raping and pillaging.
Ma’s fawning over China can be readily pictured in the mind. It can even be understood.
Yet his emulation of Hu so soon after his inauguration leaves one flabbergasted.
Cao Changqing is a writer based in the US.
TRANSLATED BY ANGELA HONG
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,