Rushing to respond to President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) recent interview with the Wall Street Journal in which he was quoted as supporting a timetable of 10 years for Taiwan and China to consider unification, the Presidential Office on Tuesday said that the president had been misquoted.
Ma’s actual and complete wording was: “Whether there will be reunification as expected by the mainland side depends very much on what is going to unfold in the next decades.
“This is a question no one can answer at this stage. But as the president of this country, I believe that the 23 million people of Taiwan want to secure one or two generations of peace and prosperity so that people on either side of the Taiwan Strait can have sufficient time and freedom to understand, to appreciate and to decide what to do,” the Presidential Office’s version read, stressing that Ma’s words in the Nov. 25 interview were “next decades,” not “next decade.”
The Presidential Office may think it has put out the fire with this explanation, but it has missed the point.
Whether the wording was “next decade” or “next decades” is beside the case.
The crux of the controversy is: What gives Ma the authority to set a timetable of any duration for Taiwanese to consider unification with China?
The decision on Taiwan’s future — be it independence, unification or the “status quo” — lies in the hands of Taiwanese. It is not a subject that the Taiwanese people have authorized the president to decide unilaterally, nor a subject that should be influenced by what people on the other side of the Strait believe.
During campaigning and when delivering major speeches, Ma often states that “Taiwan’s future should be decided by its 23 million people.”
This wording sounds democratic and shows respect for the idea that Taiwanese should determine the country’s fate.
Ma’s remarks in the Wall Street Journal interview, however, confirm that he wants eventual unification with China.
Ironically, amid the brouhaha over Ma’s remarks on a “unification” timetable, a new survey has provided more troubling food for thought for the president.
In the latest CommonWealth magazine poll on Tuesday, 62 percent of those surveyed said they consider themselves Taiwanese, 22 percent said they see themselves as both Taiwanese and Chinese, while a mere 8 percent said they regard themselves as Chinese.
Of particular interest is the finding that among respondents aged 18 to 29, 75 percent described themselves as Taiwanese.
As the saying goes: “There go the people, I must follow them, for I am their leader.”
Ma, as the nation’s highest elected official, should heed mainstream opinion rather than act unilaterally and obstinately.
Only this way will he have the chance to serve another term as president.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS