Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) attendance at the Delphi Economic Forum in Greece last week sparked a controversy, not only because he was belittled by being referred to as the “Former Leader of Taipei,” but also for his denial that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC) are two separate entities. The incident shows that politicians who bow to Beijing’s “one China” principle puts their, and their country’s, dignity on the line.
The series of events that led to Ma being adorned with the ludicrous title began with his invitation to the forum, whose Web site initially labeled him the “former president of Taipei.” After Taiwan’s representative office in Greece protested to the event’s organizers, the title was corrected as the “former president of Taiwan.”
However, on Wednesday last week, the organizers endowed Ma with the meaningless appellation “Former Leader of Taipei.” Still, the organizers must have been unhappy that the title, as silly as it was, hinted that Ma, a Taiwanese politician, was the “leader” of “Taipei.” They moved to rid his title of any sign of Taiwanese sovereignty, and decided on “former president of the Kuomintang party-Chinese Taipei.”
They also left his biography blank, with a notice saying: “Coming soon.”
The incident was obviously caused by interference from China, which has consistently hindered Taiwan’s participation in international events.
Ironically, it came only weeks after Ma visited China, where he trumpeted Beijing’s “one China” principle. His compromise apparently did not earn him any favors with the Chinese Communist Party.
However, at the forum, Ma did not criticize China for trying to limit Taiwan’s international exchanges, nor did he mention Beijing’s incessant military drills. Instead, he said that Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) statement that “the ROC in Taiwan and the PRC are two separate entities that exist independently of each other” contravenes the ROC Constitution.
He also rehashed the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) fantasy that Taiwan and China belong to “one China,” and called on Tsai to engage in dialogue with China to avoid a war and achieve peace, as if it were not Beijing that had cut communication channels in the first place.
Ma distorted the cross-strait “status quo” — that Taiwan and China are separate states not subordinate to each other — in front of an international audience at a time when Taiwan is facing increased threats from China, only to pander to Beijing.
His criticism of Tsai was actually a slap to his own face: During his presidential term, Ma and his administration have said that Taiwan is “an independent sovereign country,” and “the two sides of the Strait have no jurisdiction over each other.”
His latest remarks are clearly a ploy to aid the KMT in next year’s presidential election. Ma at the forum parroted the KMT’s catchprase that the election would be a choice between “war and peace,” similar to China’s insistence on “peaceful unification,” but without renouncing the use of force.
China’s ambition to take over Taiwan has increased Taiwanese’s resentment toward Beijing. More people in Taiwan now consider themselves Taiwanese, rather than Chinese. Surveys have shown that more than 80 percent of Taiwanese reject the “one China” principle. Two recent surveys showed that only about 35 percent of the respondents held positive views about Ma’s trip to China, while more than 60 percent were satisfied with Tsai’s stopover in the US early last month. Even a poll released by pro-KMT media showed that 27 percent of voters support the DPP’s cross-strait policy, higher than the 26 percent who support the KMT’s policy.
Those facts should serve as a warning that it is not worth sacrificing one’s dignity and self-identity just to pander to China.
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry gives it a strategic advantage, but that advantage would be threatened as the US seeks to end Taiwan’s monopoly in the industry and as China grows more assertive, analysts said at a security dialogue last week. While the semiconductor industry is Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” its dominance has been seen by some in the US as “a monopoly,” South Korea’s Sungkyunkwan University academic Kwon Seok-joon said at an event held by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In addition, Taiwan lacks sufficient energy sources and is vulnerable to natural disasters and geopolitical threats from China, he said.
After reading the article by Hideki Nagayama [English version on same page] published in the Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) on Wednesday, I decided to write this article in hopes of ever so slightly easing my depression. In August, I visited the National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, to attend a seminar. While there, I had the chance to look at the museum’s collections. I felt extreme annoyance at seeing that the museum had classified Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities. I kept thinking about how I could make this known, but after returning
What value does the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hold in Taiwan? One might say that it is to defend — or at the very least, maintain — truly “blue” qualities. To be truly “blue” — without impurities, rejecting any “red” influence — is to uphold the ideology consistent with that on which the Republic of China (ROC) was established. The KMT would likely not object to this notion. However, if the current generation of KMT political elites do not understand what it means to be “blue” — or even light blue — their knowledge and bravery are far too lacking
Taipei’s population is estimated to drop below 2.5 million by the end of this month — the only city among the nation’s six special municipalities that has more people moving out than moving in this year. A city that is classified as a special municipality can have three deputy mayors if it has a population of more than 2.5 million people, Article 55 of the Local Government Act (地方制度法) states. To counter the capital’s shrinking population, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) held a cross-departmental population policy committee meeting on Wednesday last week to discuss possible solutions. According to Taipei City Government data, Taipei’s