Minister of the Interior Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) said the government would not allow World Uyghur Congress president Rebiya Kadeer to visit Taiwan because her organization is closely associated with a terrorist group. Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) immediately voiced approval of the decision. That’s how easy it was for the government to rid itself of another hot potato.
But is Kadeer really a terrorist? Ten days before the opening of the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games last summer, then-US president George W. Bush received a group of five well-known Chinese dissidents, including Wei Jingsheng (魏京生), at the White House. Kadeer was one of them. At the meeting, Bush reiterated his support for the Uighurs’ pursuit of human rights and democracy. Kadeer said Bush’s decision to receive them at that moment was a strong message to the Chinese government that it must stop suppressing human rights.
In a photo later released by the White House, we saw Bush enthusiastically putting his arm on Kadeer’s right shoulder. Bush was a leader of the fight against terrorism. Would the CIA or FBI have let him meet Kadeer if she were linked to a terrorist group? The fact is that the two had already met in Prague in 2007, at which time he praised her in public as a human rights fighter who was not afraid of a tyrannical government.
Jiang’s statement was a reflection of his ignorance and shamelessness. He not only defamed a human rights activist but also embarrassed the Republic of China. Think about it: If Kadeer cannot visit Taiwan, then Wei would most likely be refused as well. Will everyone who is a thorn in the side to Beijing be prohibited from visiting in the future?
Democracy and freedom are Taiwan’s most precious values. Instead of performing a character assassination on Kadeer, Jiang has seriously damaged the nation’s image and dignity.
It is true that political realities force Taiwan to maintain friendly relations with China. Despite the green camp’s accusing Ma of leaning toward China and selling out Taiwan over the past year, his efforts to improve cross-strait relations are basically correct.
Yet one should not maintain a friendship at all costs and one must not act obsequiously. Taiwanese society respects human rights. Kadeer is a human rights activist worthy of respect. Why should we abuse her — and belittle ourselves?
The Ministry of the Interior is just like the Hong Kong government, which prevents Chinese democracy activists from attending the local memorial events for the Tiananmen Square Massacre. Hong Kong’s decision is understandable, as it is a special administrative region of the People’s Republic of China. Jiang, however, is denigrating himself. He is an academic-turned-politician who has lost his intellectual conscience. He does not shrink from trampling the nation’s founding spirit in order to curry favor with an authoritarian country.
The point of Taiwanese musician Freddy Lim’s (林昶佐) invitation of Kadeer was clear. Regardless of the purpose, however, anyone capable of serving as premier or minister should have the wisdom to abide by certain fundamental principles. This invitation was a test.
What would happen if Kadeer came? I don’t believe Jiang is afraid that Kadeer plans to set up an al-Qaeda cell in Taiwan. He is afraid of upsetting Beijing. But cross-strait reconciliation is in full swing: Would the Chinese Communist Party really freeze this process because of Kadeer?
The government should stop and think: What happened to Taiwan’s national dignity?
Huang Juei-min is a law professor at Providence University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
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