A veil has been drawn over the world’s media. Last weekend’s half-million strong protest against China and the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) barely rated a mention in major outlets. Instead, a trifling incident in Tainan involving a flatfooted Chinese delegation and poor security measures was blown out of proportion by local and international media and the government. Prosecutors are leading the charge and champing at the bit to kill a few chickens and scare a few monkeys — the chickens being the elderly and excitable hacks from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the monkeys those who dare oppose government policy on China.
Foreign commentators could be forgiven for seeing reports of another mass rally on the streets of Taipei and yawning. After all, such protests are not uncommon and almost never result in violence or significant disruption. In this case, however, the DPP protest marked the beginning of the end of Ma’s grace period as an engineer for cross-strait rapprochement. The tide has turned, and the nervousness of the Ma administration as it battles fiscal incompetence and ideological banality reflects this.
Mediocre governments, like mediocre individuals, revert to what they know best when placed under pressure, even if this is the opposite of what is required to change the situation to their advantage.
In the case of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and its proxies in the judicial system, this amounts to narrowing the gap between party and state so clumsily and risibly that ordinary people detect weakness and malice — and grow more nervous.
Consistent with the KMT’s legislative agenda, the government and judicial officers are politicizing agencies to the point where their neutrality should be called into question. The protests that will follow Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), chairman of China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS), are threatening to tap dissatisfaction over these developments, and could result in a deterioration that Ma manifestly does not have the skill to handle.
In other words, courtesy of Ma’s ineptitude, it seems inevitable that cross-strait detente was going to arrive hand in hand with civil unrest.
The irony of all this, of course, is that Ma was Washington’s preferred candidate. Yet the US seemed oblivious that the KMT government was going to have to deal with concerted opposition to its policies — and in the same manner as the ancien regime.
Representations have already been made to the US State Department about increasing abuse of speculative powers by local prosecutors and their disgraceful manipulation of the media. What kind of reception they will receive is hard to predict. On the one hand, the State Department boasts an admirable mechanism of global human rights analysis that culminates in an indispensable annual report. On the other, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has been tarred by the Bush administration’s attacks on fundamental judicial processes in the Guantanamo Bay debacle.
The likely scenario is that American Institute in Taiwan Director Stephen Young will have a few quiet words with President Ma or Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) after the ARATS visit is over.
By that time, it may be too late. There is evidence that politicized members of the community are girding for something more dramatic. If this turns out to be the case, the State Department and the AIT might refer to an American classic of political thought, Civil Disobedience — referred to on this page in yesterday’s edition — before speaking out. There they might find insights into the entitlements of an unhappy citizenry in the face of a government that undermines civil liberties and the spirit of the law.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS