Successive governments have rightly boasted of Taiwan’s transformation from an authoritarian regime into a vibrant democracy and its peaceful transfers of power. Taiwan has also been heralded within and without as the first (ethnic) Chinese democracy, a beacon not only for those across the Taiwan Strait, but elsewhere in Asia.
The growing commitment to human rights by the citizens of this nation and the government — as evidenced by the passage into law of two key UN covenants and a willingness to tackle abuses internally and condemn those who commit such outrages in other nations — is also noteworthy, even though much remains to be done domestically to improve the treatment of migrant workers, especially in the fisheries industry.
Taiwan is held up both as a model of what is possible and as a rebuke to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its regime in Beijing to whom the merest whiff of criticism is anathema. In particular, under the two Democratic Progressive Party administrations, there has been much talk of using Taiwan’s soft power to counter China’s aggressive posturing and its continuous efforts to block this nation on the international stage.
However, one major “soft power” achievement has come not from the government, but from the grassroots level, although it is one that deserves the government’s full support.
Much has been written about how the Sunflower movement in the spring of 2014 — and its occupation of the Legislative Yuan — had a major impact on the development of the “Umbrella movement” that grew out of the Occupy Hong Kong protests that began in September 2014.
The exchange of ideas and visits between Hong Kong pro-democracy activists and young Taiwanese since 2015 led to an outpouring of support in Taiwan for Hong Kongers during the anti-extradition protests in the territory that erupted a year ago.
While Taiwanese finding common cause with Hong Kongers who want to retain the rights and freedoms that they have enjoyed is easy to understand — for as Hong Kong goes, so could Taiwan — what is really interesting is that young people and democracy advocates elsewhere in Asia are increasingly willing to speak up for Hong Kongers and Taiwanese in the face of China’s blatant oppression, both on the street and over the Internet.
A “Milk Tea Alliance” among netizens in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Thailand and the Philippines emerged this spring, trolling China’s increasingly jingoistic online army that lashes out and threatens celebrities, multinationals and anyone else who directly or indirectly challenges Beijing’s “one China” mantra.
Like the Sunflower movement and pro-democracy supporters over the past year or more in Hong Kong, the alliance is self-initiated and spontaneous, interested in greater democracy in their own countries and others, as well as countering Beijing’s cudgel diplomacy, military assertiveness and regional ambitions, even if their own leaders are hesitant to do so.
Whether it is countering the CCP’s historical claims, China’s aggressive dam-building program that threatens those along the lower reaches of the Mekong River or Beijing militarizing the South China Sea, the power of the #MilkTeaAlliance is growing.
While members of this expanding pan-Asia alliance do not share the same language or culture, they share a conviction that they have the right — if not a duty — to criticize and challenge those in power for the betterment of their nations.
They are the living embodiment of the CCP’s worst nightmare — free-thinking individuals who are not afraid to speak their minds.
Just how much the CCP fears such people was made abundantly clear by Beijing’s overreach in its new National Security Law for Hong Kong, which includes the threat to go after anyone suspected of inciting secession even if they do not reside in the territory.
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
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,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
As Taiwan’s domestic political crisis deepens, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have proposed gutting the country’s national spending, with steep cuts to the critical foreign and defense ministries. While the blue-white coalition alleges that it is merely responding to voters’ concerns about corruption and mismanagement, of which there certainly has been plenty under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and KMT-led governments, the rationales for their proposed spending cuts lay bare the incoherent foreign policy of the KMT-led coalition. Introduced on the eve of US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the KMT’s proposed budget is a terrible opening
RSS