Wu Den-yih (吳敦義), a contender for Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairperson, has been a premier and vice president, but to compare him to democracy pioneer Peng Ming-min (彭明敏) would give him a higher status than he deserves, as well as be disrespectful to Peng. The contrast between the two men’s vision and demeanor perfectly illustrates two types of Taiwanese produced under the KMT’s authoritarian rule: the spineless, opportunistic political hack versus the noble and principled intellectual.
Former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) picked Wu, among others, when he was looking for talented young Taiwanese to serve in government. Several decades later, in order to get elected as KMT chairman, Wu can still be seen shedding tears in Chiang’s memory. This sight is enough to give you goosebumps. Wu is a coward who only knows how to cling to others’ coattails, expecting charity from a regime that is alien to Taiwan. There are plenty more like him, and they have held back the development of Taiwan’s democracy.
Long before Chiang began promoting young Taiwanese, Peng had already made outstanding academic achievements.
Chiang’s father, Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), wanted to hold Peng up as a model for others and arranged for him to become the youngest-ever chairman of National Taiwan University’s Department of Political Science. He also appointed him as an “adviser” to the Republic of China’s delegation to the UN in the hope that he would help counteract Taiwanese independence.
Had Peng’s vision been as limited as that of Wu, showing his “gratitude” by playing along with the KMT’s script, he could have climbed far above the likes of Wu, but he chose instead to follow his conscience as an intellectual by jointly authoring the Declaration of Formosan Self-Salvation, a manifesto announcing the reality that Taiwan and China are two separate nations and calling for Taiwan to apply for UN membership under its own name.
As a result, Peng and a number of other outstanding young people were sent to jail.
The KMT’s martial law regime suppressed Taiwan by persuasion as well as by force. The persuasion part used the education system and media to brainwash the population, while the forceful part involved the army, police, spies, gangsters and judicial repression. Depending on whether dissenters came from China or Taiwan, they were accused of being “communist bandits” or “Taiwan independence elements.”
Maybe the two Chiangs thought that Peng was a mere bookworm and not very useful, so it would be better to cultivate some spineless political hacks.
Then-Chinese premier Zhou Enlai (周恩來) thought differently. He understood that Taiwanese independence supporters were no fellow travelers of the Chinese Communist Party, and he had a clearer idea about what intellectuals could achieve.
In his secret negotiations with then-US president Richard Nixon and his national security adviser Henry Kissinger, Zhou showed scant regard for Chiang Kai-shek, because what he was really afraid of was the Taiwanese independence tendency that Peng represented.
The two Chiangs have long since been dead and buried. Often mocked by his own party, Wu tries to win support with his spineless sobbing.
In contrast, Peng is stalwart, a man with real backbone. Throughout his life, he made sincere contributions to this land, this nation of Taiwan. Despite never having held high office, he was a leader in his own right, and his example has helped form the “natural independence” tendency in the new generation of Taiwanese.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Julian Clegg
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS