Chinese state media on Tuesday criticized US talk show host John Oliver for a satirical sketch that offered a brief history of Taiwan and explained its political situation.
That a US talk show that delivers its message through satire discussed Taiwan highlights the ridiculous nature of Taiwan’s plight — in which Taiwanese cannot represent themselves at international organizations due to pressure from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), despite the nation never having been ruled by the PRC.
In an op-ed, the Global Times said that President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and her Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) are damaging the “status quo” in the Taiwan Strait, claiming it was a situation that most Taiwanese want to maintain. It also accused the US of pushing “autocracy and ideological values” in the Indo-Pacific region.
Clearly the piece was written for English-language speakers living in China where access to international media is limited, not for a global audience that has seen China send dozens of warplanes near Taiwan over the past several months without any provocation. It also fails to mention how the PRC has been threatening Southeast Asian nations over the past several years by militarizing the South China Sea.
It is understandable that Chinese state media would twist the facts, even in English. What is perhaps even more telling is that Beijing felt the need to respond at all to a satirical sketch, highlighting its fragility in the face of facts and the importance it places in maintaining its disinformation campaign.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is threatened by anything that challenges its official stance, which is vastly different from the situation in Taiwan. The CCP is unable to fathom the idea of free thought and dissent, which is highlighted in the Global Times, when it cites as a failure of Taiwan’s democracy fighting in the legislature in November last year over US pork imports.
The piece argued that Tsai decided to import US pork despite opposition, and that she threatened the health of Taiwanese. This demonstrates the CCP’s lack of understanding about how such decisions are made in a democracy, and overlooks that the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) opposition to the policy is acceptable only because Taiwan is a democracy. The KMT is bringing the issue to a referendum in December, when the public is to vote on whether to reverse the decision. Perhaps the CCP could give examples of when its policies were challenged, or when its people voted on government policy.
The Chinese government would have been better off not responding at all to Oliver’s sketch. In doing so, it emphasized its confusion over facts, the illegitimacy of its position and its weakness in the face of free speech.
The growing support for Taiwan internationally shows that as people around the world experience Chinese aggression themselves, they are more aware of Taiwan’s plight and the importance of supporting it. The most powerful examples of this are Taiwan’s friends in the Czech Republic, France and elsewhere who were personally threatened by China for simply visiting Taiwan.
Even in the non-political arena, Taiwanese diver Mia Hou (侯一明) had her flag removed during a competition in Cyprus, which prompted divers from 11 other countries to remove their own flags in solidarity.
China’s baseless response to Oliver’s truthful and entertaining take on Taiwan highlights the CCP’s weakness and vulnerability. The DPP and other parties that have Taiwan’s best interests in mind should encourage more international programs to discuss the country’s plight.
Many foreigners, particularly Germans, are struck by the efficiency of Taiwan’s administration in routine matters. Driver’s licenses, household registrations and similar procedures are handled swiftly, often decided on the spot, and occasionally even accompanied by preferential treatment. However, this efficiency does not extend to all areas of government. Any foreigner with long-term residency in Taiwan — just like any Taiwanese — would have encountered the opposite: agencies, most notably the police, refusing to accept complaints and sending applicants away at the counter without consideration. This kind of behavior, although less common in other agencies, still occurs far too often. Two cases
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Most countries are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with condemnations of militarism and imperialism, and commemoration of the global catastrophe wrought by the war. On the other hand, China is to hold a military parade. According to China’s state-run Xinhua news agency, Beijing is conducting the military parade in Tiananmen Square on Sept. 3 to “mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.” However, during World War II, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had not yet been established. It
RSS