You know election time is around the corner when you start hearing Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government officials trumpeting “Taiwan” and “Taiwanese people” in their speeches.
At a seminar in Taipei last week on cross-strait relations from 2008 to this year, Mainland Affairs Council Minister Lai Shin-yuan (賴幸媛) said in a speech that “putting Taiwan first for the benefit of the people” was the main principle guiding the KMT government’s policy toward China.
“It also needs to be ensured that [Taiwanese] people have the right to decide the future development of cross-strait relations,” she said.
With Double Ten National Day this weekend, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) will also likely accentuate the importance of “Taiwan’s interests” and “Taiwanese people” in his national day address.
Naturally, government officials will highlight the great importance they attach to the nation’s interests and its people. However, amid the backdrop of the KMT government signing the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with China, it is not hard to see the irony and farce of pro-Taiwan words pouring out of KMT officials’ mouths.
How can the Ma government convince the voters that it truly believes that the “people have the right to decide the future development of cross-strait relations” when the public is muzzled and the government rejects any chance for critics to have their voices heard through a referendum?
On Thursday last week, the Executive Yuan’s Committee of Appeal upheld the Referendum Review Committee’s rejection of a petition, signed by 200,000 people, to put the ECFA to a referendum, again supressing the public’s voice. So much for KMT remarks that the public has the right to decide the future of cross-strait development.
The KMT government should heed the warning suggested by a recent Research, Development and Evaluation Commission poll. The survey showed that in 2007, 63 percent of people referred to themselves as Taiwanese, while 15.4 percent considered themselves Chinese. In 2008, after Ma won the presidency, the group that considered themselves Taiwanese rose to 67.1 percent, while those who regarded themselves as Chinese dropped to 13.6 percent. In a similar poll in May last year, the number who saw themselves as Taiwanese slid to 64.6 percent, although those who saw themselves as Chinese dipped even further, to 11.5 percent.
Statistics from National Chengchi University’s Election Study Center show that in 2007, 43 percent of respondents saw themselves as Taiwanese, while 5.4 percent considered themselves Chinese. In June this year, the percentage of people who identified themselves as Taiwanese rose to 52 percent, while those claiming to be Chinese dropped to 3.8 percent. Meanwhile, the group that saw themselves as Taiwanese as well as Chinese also declined, dropping from 44.7 percent in 2007 to 40.4 percent in June this year.
These numbers suggest that the public’s identification with Taiwan has not diminished despite the Ma administration’s China-friendly policies.
The Ma government can keep using the words “Taiwan” and “Taiwanese people” all it wants, but in case the KMT hasn’t realized, using these phrases to get votes and then tossing them away like toilet paper when their use has been fulfilled will only hurt the Ma government, undermining its credibility and repulsing the public with its hypocrisy.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS