The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) originally employed the “1992 consensus” lie — which says that there is “one China, with each side having its own interpretation” of what that China is — to prop up the Republic of China’s (ROC) statehood for the public.
Using the non-existent consensus, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said that the ROC and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) exist under the “one China” roof.
However, the truth is that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), although it often echoes the consensus just to suppress “Taiwanization,” sees the PRC as the sole representative of China. The “one China, different interpretations” framework leans toward the PRC and therein lies the source of Ma’s failure.
The pro-Taiwan camp, led by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), and the pro-China camp see the nation as one ROC, with each side having its own interpretation of what that ROC is.
According to the pro-China camp, the ROC is China, while the pro-Taiwan camp sees it as Taiwan.
As a result, the two sides have different interpretations of, and take different positions on, DPP presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) proposal to maintain the “status quo.”
However, since the KMT’s “one China” leans toward the PRC, while “one ROC” leans toward Taiwan, the KMT comes up short on both counts and Tsai stands to benefit from this situation.
The KMT used to use its policy of maintaining the “status quo” to suppress the DPP and the rest of the pro-Taiwan camp, but this has now turned into a powerful weapon in the hands of the DPP. No matter how hard the KMT wants to monopolize the slogan and how hard Ma wants to take credit for it, they can no longer restore the public’s trust in its legitimacy.
The “status quo” means that Taiwan does not belong to the PRC — which has been hijacked by the CCP — nor does it belong to China, which the CCP has made its own. This is a result of political realities.
Maintaining the “status quo” is a rather conservative stance.
However, this is the character of the Taiwanese society that has been shaped by the KMT’s pro-China educational policies and the media after World War II. Despite being so conservative, Taiwan, a nation whose official title is the Republic of China, belongs to Taiwanese, not to China.
When the KMT says that it will maintain the “status quo,” it means that it will lean toward the China. Taiwanese, and even many of the Mainlanders who relocated to Taiwan with the KMT in the hope of finding a real nation, freedom, democracy, fairness and justice, find it impossible to understand the political direction of a party that is heading to a dead end.
By taking into account the “status quo” that says the ROC does not belong to China, perhaps Taiwanese can continue their efforts at reforming and reconstructing the nation. This would be a self-elevation movement for all Taiwanese who pin their hopes on the nation regardless of when they arrived here.
Based on the democratization movement that has already taken hold in the nation, yet another beautiful chapter in Taiwan’s peaceful revolution is set to be written.
No matter how hard the KMT wants to beautify or hide its goal of eventual unification — which in fact means surrendering to China — Taiwanese will no longer believe the party’s lies.
Will the KMT be able to save itself simply by replacing a presidential candidate who has exposed the party’s true face?
Without fundamental changes to the party’s character, what is the use? Why even bother?
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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
RSS