President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) raised concerns when he said the idea of Taiwan and China functioning as separate governments within a “one China” framework could be up for discussion. The Presidential Office quickly clarified that what he meant was that the idea should be discussed on an academic level, not in cross-strait negotiations anytime soon. That did little to ameliorate the concerns of critics, and rightly so.
Ma’s statements, even as bland as they are, cause concern because he suffers from a credibility gap that no amount of platitudes or photo opportunities can bridge. It is a gap that keeps growing. To be fair, however, it is not a gap that is his alone; he shares it with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
His “separate governments in a ‘one China’ framework” comment raised hackles because of the dense fog that has surrounded cross-strait negotiations since Ma took office, with the accompanying lack of legislative oversight of the talks and the use of “semi-official” bodies to give his government credit when he wants it, and plausible denial when he needs it.
All those KMT-Chinese Communist Party (CCP) lovefests have not helped either, given the pronouncements that have emanated from them. Honorary chairmen and other KMT members appear to have forgotten that they live in a multi-party nation, not the one-party state they grew up in or the single-party China they apparently aspire to. There are clear indications that much of the cross-strait agenda is dictated by Beijing, with input from Taipei.
Ma wants to take credit for inspiring more academics to think about cross-strait issues, but the problem is he only appears interested in what Chinese academics or those in his own chorus line have to say. He has either turned a deaf ear to those who have queried any of his policies or — in the case of an open letter from 34 academics and other experts about the probe into “missing official documents” from former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) era — had his aides brush aside the concerns on the grounds that the signatories were foreigners who really did not (ie, could not) understand Taiwan-China relations or were interfering in Taiwan’s judicial affairs, thereby impinging upon its sovereignty.
It is the same credibility gap that made his posing in the cockpit of an upgraded Indigenous Defence Fighter (IDF) on Thursday look ridiculous. The revamping of the IDFs’ avionics and flight control systems cannot make up for the air force’s limited number of fighter jets and the overall reduced capabilities of the military — not when compared with the rapidly modernizing People’s Liberation Army.
The shameful lack of military readiness cannot be laid solely on Ma’s concessionary “make talk, not war” mindset, but the blame can and should be put squarely on the KMT’s shoulders. It was unwilling to vote for any major defense packages during the eight years Chen was in office, simply as part of its efforts to kill any legislation that might be seen as giving Chen’s administration an advantage, regardless of whether the nation needed it or not.
In poll after poll, a vast majority of Taiwanese have said no to Beijing’s “one country, two systems” principle in any way, shape or form. Despite China’s economic blandishments, they are satisfied with the “status quo.” And why not, when Beijing’s repressive government and the escalating number of ecological disasters make the vaunted “economic miracle” along China’s east coast look more like a Potomkin village with each passing year — and each successive anti-graft drive in the CCP.
That brings up the final plank in Ma’s credibility gap. Despite repeated pledges, he has been unable to reform the KMT or Taiwan’s “black gold” politics. His administration’s only real “success” in its anti-graft efforts has been the jailing of Chen — and the indictment of former president, and the KMT’s other archnemesis, Lee Teng-hui (李登輝).
Please mind the gaps.
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 —
Prior to marrying a Taiwanese and moving to Taiwan, a Chinese woman, surnamed Zhang (張), used her elder sister’s identity to deceive Chinese officials and obtain a resident identity card in China. After marrying a Taiwanese, surnamed Chen (陳) and applying to move to Taiwan, Zhang continued to impersonate her sister to obtain a Republic of China ID card. She used the false identity in Taiwan for 18 years. However, a judge ruled that her case does not constitute forgery and acquitted her. Does this mean that — as long as a sibling agrees — people can impersonate others to alter, forge
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