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.
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