During President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) time in office, he has pushed ahead with what he has called a diplomatic truce with China. This means that Ma kowtows to China in every way possible, and that interviews with foreign media no longer serve as a platform for defending Taiwan’s rights and interests as they used to under the former administration.
However, this is the way Ma likes it. When he has nothing to say, he makes up something ambiguous and the whole affair ends up with “corrections” and “clarifications.”
His recent interview with The Associated Press (AP) was no exception. The more he spoke, the more pro-Chinese he sounded, and he showed that internationally he fears China, while at home he fears the voters. These two fears have one thing in common — fear of not being re-elected. This kowtowing and deception was at the center of his demand that AP “correct” its report about the interview.
Ma was most concerned with correcting his remarks about China implementing democracy and respecting human rights as a conditional basis for any form of political unification. The AP reporter was worried that he may have misunderstood and therefore asked follow-up questions to clarify Ma’s stance. Ma, however, did not clarify things on the spot, but instead demanded a correction later on because he was afraid that what he said might have offended China.
The second correction that Ma, who seemingly supports the idea of “eventual unification” with China, wanted was to emphasize that there was no timetable according to which he would start political talks with China if re-elected. The AP reporter asked follow-up questions on this with the caveat “if my understanding is correct” to confirm Ma’s answers, but Ma failed to “correct” anything, saying instead that it would depend on how fast relations with China develop and whether economic issues could be satisfactorily resolved.
In other words, Ma said that economic issues should be resolved before discussing political issues, and did not reject the possibility that he would initiate political talks with China if he won a second term. He only said it would depend on the progress of economic talks — a reasonable interpretation is, of course, that once economic talks were completed, they would be followed by political talks. That kind of statement would scare off voters and so he had to lie to cover up his intent.
The statement about not having a timetable for political talks was exposed as a lie by China’s Taiwan Affairs Office Director Wang Yi (王毅) when he said economic talks have already included discussion about political issues. This makes it clear that Beijing directs the talks and Ma is unable to resist. He will have to forget his preconditions of democracy and human rights for talks as his stance is even weaker than the 1991 Guidelines for National Unification.
Three days before the US and China established diplomatic relations, they were still saying that there was no timetable for doing so, which of course was an obvious lie. The same is true of Ma’s comments. Taiwanese voters may have been cheated once, but having seen Ma break his promises, they will not be cheated a second time.
James Wang is a -commentator on the media.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
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