It appears that the controversy over comments made by Jiang Ping (江平), head of China’s delegation to the Tokyo Film Festival, has come to an end. China’s Taiwan Affairs Office has said the incident was unfortunate and attributed Jiang’s remarks to a lack of communication, while the Executive Yuan has happily designated Jiang’s overt rudeness a matter of personal behavior. That it seems is that, except for the fact that no one really believes such politically expedient assertions to be actually true.
If Jiang’s outburst was an isolated incident, then how do we explain the Taiwanese student studying in South Korea who was chased and beaten up by a group of 30 Chinese students when she displayed the Republic of China (ROC) flag after winning a Korean speech competition in December last year?
How about the decision at the Venice Film Festival in 2007 to label Taiwanese movies such as Lust, Caution (色戒), Blood Brothers (天堂口), Just in Love (幫幫我,愛神) and The Most Distant Course (最遙遠的距離), as films from “Taiwan, China” under pressure from Beijing.
Or there is Taiwanese competitor Liu You-chen (劉祐辰), who was insulted by Chinese participants at the World Cyber Games in Seattle in 2007 after he showed the ROC flag when receiving his bronze medal?
Any random search on the Internet or cursory survey asking about the experiences of overseas Taiwanese students would instantly disprove the Executive Yuan’s claim that this was “an isolated incident.”
Anyone in his or her right mind knows perfectly well that Jiang’s remarks were simply the tip of the iceberg and appeasement cannot possibly be the best approach to such challenges to the nation’s sovereignty.
We cannot but wonder, if as the Taiwan Affairs Office said the incident was the result of a lack of communication, what would have been the result of “proper communication?”
Will it ever be possible for competitors and delegates from our nation taking part in international events to be referred to as Taiwanese and nothing else?
Over the years, the government has rarely, if ever, indicated to Beijing that it will simply not tolerate similar acts of rudeness.
Although Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) seemed to take a tougher stance on the Jiang controversy by saying on the legislative floor that he supported a proposal made by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators to list Jiang as persona non grata, this does not mean the KMT Government government intends to follow through on the lawmakers’ plan. Indeed, Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman James Chang (章計平) declined on Tuesday to comment further on the issue.
One cannot help but wonder if the plan was not deliberately concocted to temporarily appease Taiwanese anger, only to be quietly shelved when the brouhaha dies down.
The KMT administration must publicly demonstrate that it is committed to defending the nation’s dignity and it can do this by fully supporting a legislative resolution to sanction Jiang, and endorsing a Democratic Progressive Party proposal to demand an apology from China.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said in a speech in Tainan yesterday that China should treat Taiwan with benevolence while Taiwan should interact with China with wisdom.
True perhaps, but wisdom means knowing when to play tough instead of constantly backing down when the nation’s sovereignty is challenged.
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS