No statements seem too ridiculous in Taiwan, with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and its unbelievable claims. The KMT promotes national policies that bear no relation to the realities on the streets and in the homes of Taiwan. What Taiwan needs is not a fantasy world, but a sustainable future based on harmony between national policies, the wishes of the population and the realities of Taiwan today.
A few examples illustrate the upside-down perspective of Taiwan’s relationship with China, such as President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) considering himself president of China and Taiwan, despite the fact that the whole world recognizes Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) as the president of China.
It also makes no sense to say that the recently signed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) is between “two regions” in the Republic of China, and to claim that the agreement upholds Taiwan’s sovereignty based on a non-existent “1992 consensus” about “one China.”
The government has promised “no unification” during Ma’s presidency. Therefore, it also appears illogical to promote unification by calling China’s response “pragmatic,” as the presidential spokeman did after China emphasized that Singapore “should recognize China’s sovereignty over Taiwan” when Taiwan and Singapore initiated talks about a trade deal.
The negative consequences for Taiwan because of these statements are twofold: First, they portray Taiwan as a part of China to the international community. This would be a reasonable policy if the Taiwanese approved, but they do not. More than 80 percent of the public said no to China’s “one country, two systems” policy in a recent Mainland Affairs Council survey. Given a free choice, 72 percent would vote for independence.
Second, because these statements and policies are not in harmony with what the Taiwanese public wants, they are not sustainable. To enforce such policies, the government will need to employ an unacceptable degree of political engineering to overcome resistance, which will lead only to more division.
On the domestic front, there have also been several ridiculous statements by the KMT. KMT News recently hinted that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is a “kind of Taiwanese Nazi Party,” evidently comparing the achievements of a democratic party with the atrocities of Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler, despite the fact that the DPP has had no comparable policies and embraces all people living in Taiwan.
A KMT news story on July 19 identified independence sentiment and the DPP with corruption and war, with no mention of the KMT’s own long tradition of corruption, and despite the fact that the KMT’s unification drive is no guarantee of peace for Taiwan.
Again, the KMT is trying to create a fantasy world. The problem is that the propaganda is not only fallacious, but also generates an increased and unnecessary disharmony in Taiwan.
A sustainable future requires harmony between the national policies and wishes of the population in a democratic dialogue. It is crucial for Taiwan to avoid this kind of demonization and promotion of imagined worlds, and instead to develop mutual respect and reach a level of trust where public differences are realized and can be handled.
When the international community embraces the ECFA and related policies in ignorance of these tendencies toward disharmony, they risk supporting unsustainable development. Instead, support for Taiwan’s right to self-determination, as well as democratic and economic development, is needed to foster mutual understanding in Taiwan.
Michael Danielsen is the chairman of the Copenhagen-based Taiwan Corner.
US aerospace company Boeing Co has in recent years been involved in numerous safety incidents, including crashes of its 737 Max airliners, which have caused widespread concern about the company’s safety record. It has recently come to light that titanium jet engine parts used by Boeing and its European competitor Airbus SE were sold with falsified documentation. The source of the titanium used in these parts has been traced back to an unknown Chinese company. It is clear that China is trying to sneak questionable titanium materials into the supply chain and use any ensuing problems as an opportunity to
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
Delegation-level visits between the two countries have become an integral part of transformed relations between India and the US. Therefore, the visit by a bipartisan group of seven US lawmakers, led by US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul to India from June 16 to Thursday last week would have largely gone unnoticed in India and abroad. However, the US delegation’s four-day visit to India assumed huge importance this time, because of the meeting between the US lawmakers and the Dalai Lama. This in turn brings us to the focal question: How and to what extent