The recent opening to China by President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration is generally described by the Western press as a positive development and hailed by the governments of the US and other nations as a step to reduce tension and a basis for longer-term stability in the Taiwan Strait.
However, one needs to look again at the actors and actions and see what is really happening. Even before Ma’s inauguration on May 20, his emissaries were speeding headlong toward China to lay the groundwork for these changes. In mid-April, then vice president-elect Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) attended the Boao Forum in Hainan, briefly met with Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), but was otherwise treated like the provincial chief of one of China’s outlying provinces.
Then at the end of May, right after the inauguration, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Party Chairman Wu Po-hsiung (吳伯雄) led a delegation to Nanjing and Beijing, also met with Hu, but couldn’t bring himself to call Ma “President” and only referred to him as “Mr Ma.” He also didn’t dare to refer to Taiwan as the “Republic of China” (ROC), a curious about-face in view of the fact that within Taiwan, the KMT is now insisting on not referring to Taiwan as “Taiwan” but as the “ROC.”
The third event was the first round of talks between the two semi-official organizations representing the two countries — the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) for Taiwan and the Association for Relations across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) for China. This led to the agreement to allow weekend charter flights and Chinese tourists starting last weekend.
While these developments seem innocuous and are presented as first steps in the direction of a general reduction of tension between the two sides, there are significant reasons for concern on a number of fronts.
First, the Ma administration did not attempt to achieve any consensus in Taiwan before recklessly rushing ahead into its adventure with China. It did so without any consultations with either the DPP — which received some 37 percent of the votes in the legislative election and 41 percent of the votes in the presidential election — or with the Legislative Yuan itself. No wonder that in a recent interview with the Liberty Times, Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) cautioned that there were three things requiring attention. First, national sovereignty must be ensured. Second, national security must be protected, and third, the rights of the 23 million Taiwanese must be protected. He urged the Ma administration to submit a comprehensive proposal to the legislature. This hasn’t happened yet.
Second, the Ma administration has hitched itself inextricably to the goodwill of the Beijing regime. He has mentioned the reduction of the missile threat and more “international space” for Taiwan as desirable, but he has little leverage. If Beijing doesn’t deliver or only makes token moves, Ma has little room to maneuver and is dead in the water.
Third, Ma has zigzagged on the issue of arms sales from the US. There were earlier reports that right after the inauguration the Ma administration had urged the US to slow down the timing of the notifications of arms sales. Subsequent reports indicated that the Ma administration had not initiated a freeze in the sales. Be that as it may, the fact remains that from 2002 to last year, the KMT opposition did everything possible to sabotage the US-offered arms package by blocking even a discussion in the Legislative Yuan, thereby undermining Taiwan’s security.
Fourth, by allowing Taiwan to drift into China’s orbit and sphere of influence, the US risks losing an important friend and ally in the region. Taiwan’s strategic location astride the major sea lanes from Japan and Korea to Southeast Asia makes it an important asset in support of free shipping and free trade. The US needs to set clear markers and red lines that — if crossed — would represent a threat to US interests.
Fifth, by linking Taiwan’s economy so much closer to China’s, Ma has placed Taiwan at risk of being pulled down in the event of a severe downturn in the Chinese economy. The current near-recession in the US will undoubtedly have severe repercussions on China’s economy. The first indicators are already there — a 50 percent drop in the Shanghai stock market during the past half year and hundreds, if not thousands, of Taiwanese companies in places like Shenzhen folding or moving to other countries like Vietnam.
So, if Ma is wise, he would follow a more prudent approach, based on first developing an internal consensus in Taiwan on how to move ahead, consultations with the US and Japan on security and strategic boundary conditions, and diversifying Taiwan’s economic and political links with the international community.
Only if he works along these lines will he be able to negotiate from a position of strength. The present approach will only lead to Taiwan being pushed into a corner from which it will be very difficult to extract itself. The Taiwanese people who have worked so hard for democracy deserve better.
Gerrit van der Wees is editor of Taiwan Communique, a publication based in Washington.
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