In an interview with two Singaporean newspapers on Friday, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said that if he is re-elected in 2012, he may launch talks with China on political issues. Such talks would lead to a fundamental change in cross-strait relations.
While meeting Straits Exchange Foundation Chairman Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) last Friday to persuade him not to resign, Ma said cross-strait relations would be handled based on the principles of “better to go slow than be hasty; easy issues before tough ones; and economics before politics.”
During the first year of his presidency, however, Ma’s cross-strait policy has been hasty, with three rounds of talks with China and agreements signed without legislative approval. The government is expediting cross-strait exchanges, opening up Taiwan to Chinese tourists, forging ahead on cross-strait flights and allowing Chinese investment in Taiwan. The results and potential problems of these policies have not been fully assessed. For Ma to set up a timetable for Taiwan and China to engage in political talks is rash indeed.
Ma’s announcement was aimed at his audience in Beijing, where he hopes to win more trust and policy favors, and intended to pump up his domestic support. Recent cross-strait developments have boosted stock prices, and increasing numbers of Chinese tourists have improved the fortunes of some travel businesses. These factors have eased Ma’s low approval ratings to some extent.
The political issues Ma has in mind are likely to include a cross-strait peace accord, establishing confidence measures in military matters and steps toward exchanging representative offices. Beijing will certainly insist that such negotiations be based on a consensus that Taiwan and China are part of “one China.” For Taiwan, accepting such a precondition would be like putting a yoke around its neck. Neither Ma nor his Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) can be allowed to dictate the process alone. Every citizen has the right to determine his or her own future. A referendum must be held before the government begins political negotiations with China.
After the first cross-strait agreements were signed, they were sent to the legislature for discussion and approval, but lawmakers had no chance to debate them. KMT legislators used procedural technicalities to shelve the items, allowing them to take effect automatically after two months. The KMT is likely to use such tactics to push through the new agreements. Railroading the agreements through the legislature shows the Ma government’s complete disregard for public opinion.
Opposition figures, however, are not the only ones to object to these maneuvers. Many KMT legislators, including Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平), have voiced misgivings.
Even though the KMT has regained control of both the executive and legislative branches, Ma’s record in office leaves much to be desired. Taiwan is suffering negative economic growth and rising unemployment. Disadvantaged people are being further marginalized. Civil rights and freedoms are under attack.
Faced with a host of problems, the government has chosen to stake everything on China. The public cannot afford to stand idly by but must make its concern and dissatisfaction with Ma’s policies heard. The government has a duty to listen.
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