After a week of waffling comments, it came as a relief to hear President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) voice stronger support for Hong Kong’s pro-democracy protesters during his Double Ten National Day address. However, Ma quickly undercut that support with his tone-deaf, revisionist comments about events in Taiwan and China, and his continuing eagerness to make nice with Beijing.
Ma said that democratic development in China and Hong Kong will be determined by the “wisdom and character” that Beijing’s leadership shows in its “attitude toward reform,” citing former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping’s (鄧小平) comment three decades ago about letting some people get rich first as part of the move toward economic reform. Why not let some Chinese, ie, those in Hong Kong, experience democracy first, Ma said, adding that he hoped Hong Kong, Macau and China will gradually forge ahead toward democracy.
Yet Zhongnanhai has shown little wisdom and character when it comes to democracy, only a paranoia and panic that demonstrate a profound lack of confidence within the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) about its ability to confront challengers. Its backtracking on promises made about elections in Hong Kong and the life sentence given to moderate Uighur academic Ilham Tohtic on Sept. 23 were simply the latest proof of Beijing’s intractability.
Ma’s suggestion lacks credibility, not just because of the CCP’s actions, but because he represents the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which had to be dragged, kicking and screaming, toward democracy in Taiwan. His inability as chairman of the KMT to enact democratic reforms within the party also makes it difficult to respect him as a champion of democracy.
The president’s pleas for rational debate at home struck another false note when he said that there was a threat that Taiwan’s democracy could regress, for which he blamed protesters who ignore the “lawful interests of people with different opinions.”
Ma talked about the “pure obstructionism that has made progress impossible,” saying that those who refuse to engage in discussion “are not acting in the spirit of democracy.” He urged “everyone in the opposition” to return to the system of democratic constitutionalism and said that he and all government agencies were “willing to uphold democracy by talking with people from all walks of life in a spirit of complete candor.”
It is irritating to listen to such sanctimoniousness from a man who heads the party that dragged pure obstructionism to new depths during the eight years that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was in power, blocking almost every legislative measure put forward by then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and the DPP, including suspending the operations of the Control Yuan — one of the five branches of government — by refusing to vote on Chen’s nominees.
The complete lack of candor on the part of Ma and the KMT in their handling of cross-strait negotiations is what has led to the protests that have marked each session of talks held in Taiwan, as well as the demonstrations against every cross-strait pact that has been signed.
Ma said the 21 agreements signed with China have been submitted to the Legislative Yuan — either for public reference or to undergo review — which “means they are subject to legislative supervision.” However, Ma and the KMT have tried to prevent true legislative supervision of the pacts, especially the service trade agreement, which triggered the Sunflower movement protests that led to the occupation of the Legislative Yuan’s main chamber in March and early April.
Ma’s hubristic speech was intended to hail the nation’s achievements and offer advice to Taiwanese and other “descendants of emperors Yan and Huang.” Unfortunately, it did neither.
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