Taiwan has had a locally elected government for two decades now, and its democracy has gone from strength to strength. We all thought that the days of politicians accusing outsiders of interfering in internal politics had been consigned to history some time ago. That is, until a spokesman for President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) — in response to suspicions raised by 34 academics and writers from the US, Canada, Australia and other countries about the timing of a probe into more than 30,000 documents that allegedly went missing three years ago under the former Democratic Progressive Party administration — called it “reckless interference.” This is the kind of language one would expect from China.
Accusations of “reckless interference” from outsiders is part of the lexicon of dictators the world over. During the martial law period under Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), suppressing democracy and depriving people of their rights were called “governing according to the law.” Questions by other countries about the appropriateness of government suppression, arrests and courts martial, along with calls for an end to martial law, were met with accusations of “reckless interference.”
People overseas are similarly concerned about human rights in China, expressing empathy for the victims of the Tiananmen Square Massacre, supporting Tibetan independence, objecting to China’s suppression of “Charter 08,” awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to jailed writer Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波) and, more recently, protesting the arrest of the artist Ai Weiwei (艾未未). In each of these cases, Beijing’s standard response is foreigners “don’t understand the situation,” or are “recklessly interfering” with “the rule of law” in China.
The Ma administration has apparently stooped to using the language of the Chinese communists and Chiang Kai-shek, showing just how far democracy, human rights, justice and fairness have receded in Taiwan over the past three years. For the government to accuse individuals from other countries, who have shown themselves to be longstanding friends of Taiwan and its democracy, of not understanding the situation and of “reckless interference,” is more ridiculous and reprehensible than Beijing’s behavior. Taiwan depends on international concern and support for its security and independence.
Chiang and his son, Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), had the support of the US Republican Party for their anti-communist stand, while accusing the Democrats of “reckless interference” in internal affairs. Former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) had the support of both the Democrats and Republicans for their efforts in establishing and developing democracy in Taiwan and for standing up against the communists, and therefore had no call to accuse anyone of interference as an excuse to neglect their responsibilities.
The Ma administration has tossed aside the gains Taiwan has made — which secured US support for its democratic and anti-communist policies — and rudely dismissed comments made by the nation’s longstanding friends. The result is that Republican support has dissipated and the Democrats have lost hope for Taiwan, leading to a number of US academics, who have placed their hopes in China, and several former US officials, in the name of US interests, advocating sacrificing Taiwan as a way to improve ties with China.
Making enemies of the allies of Taiwanese democracy and human rights under the twin banner of “rule of law” and “governing in accordance with the law” just reveals the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) for what it is: an anti-democratic organization willing to sacrifice Taiwan and collude with the Chinese communists.
James Wang is a political commentator.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and