In a meeting with Legislative Speaker You Si-kun (游錫?) on Oct. 16, Human Rights Foundation president Thor Halvorssen said that during a visit to Taiwan in 2010, he was warned by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs under the administration of then-president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) “not to criticize the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]” ahead of the Venezuelan rights advocate’s speech at a conference in Taipei.
However, Halvorssen spoke at length about the CCP’s behavior, with Ma and other officials leaving five minutes after his speech started.
After the speech, Halvorssen was told that he would have to return to his hotel in a taxi because the driver who had been designated to him had been assigned another task.
Ma Ying-jeou Foundation director Hsiao Hsu-tsen (蕭旭岑) said that he had not heard Ma say any such thing to any foreign guest, adding that it was obviously not the kind of thing the former president would say.
Halvorssen’s account is not the truth, Hsiao said.
How does Hsiao know the whole story when he only started as deputy secretary-general to Ma in 2013? Even if it was the ministry that made the request of Halvorssen, was it not Ma who set foreign policy?
Ma’s attitude was clear from his behavior during the speech.
Before the handover of Hong Kong from Britain to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1997, Taiwanese officials would have notes attached to their visas in their passports instructing them not to make things difficult for Hong Kong’s government while visiting the territory, meaning they should not annoy the CCP. The Taiwanese officials of the time said that the practice was humiliating and demeaning.
The Ma government acted just as Hong Kong’s government had.
Moreover, when Ma visited China in March, he interacted with the media at a reception room of the former presidential office in Nanjing. He mentioned Sun Yat-sen’s (孫中山) induction as an interim president there and hesitantly said he began serving in “that position” in 2008.
What is “that position”? As a former president of the Republic of China (ROC), how could Ma stand in Nanjing — which according to the Constitution belongs to the ROC — but fear offending the CCP?
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and the Democratic Progressive Party have emphasized that “neither side of the Taiwan Strait is subordinate to the other,” but Ma has never agreed with this.
On Double Ten National Day on Oct. 10, Ma and other members of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) boycotted the main celebration. Were they trying to say that the ROC belongs to the PRC?
Creating a new institution or event to replace a former one is a common tactic of the CCP. Mao Zedong (毛澤東) replaced the ROC with the PRC and also introduced the Central Cultural Revolution Group at the beginning of the Cultural Revolution. The CCP arranged its own transition of political systems in Hong Kong even as Chris Patten, the territory’s final British governor, was promoting political reform at the end of 1992.
Ma attempted to fragment the ROC because the word “Taiwan” was on the invitations to the main national day event in Taipei. How much does he hate “Taiwan”?
The indigenous defense submarine program led by Admiral Huang Shu-kuang (黃曙光) has also been criticized. Since Ma’s time as KMT chairman, the party has repeatedly boycotted arms purchases in the legislature. Most recently, KMT Legislator Ma Wen-chun (馬文君) has been accused of divulging details of the submarine program to the South Korean Mission in Taipei.
Ma Ying-jeou, in a speech at New York University, criticized experts in the US, saying that their ideas would turn Taiwan into a battlefield. He did not blame the CCP for threatening to use force, but criticized the US and caused divisions in Taiwan-US ties.
Ma Ying-jeou at times shows how much he hates Taiwan, but at other times proclaims himself to be Taiwanese. His behavior benefits the CCP.
With a fight looming, he has shown his true colors. He is pro-China and against the US.
Paul Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Chien Yan-ru
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
For years, the use of insecure smart home appliances and other Internet-connected devices has resulted in personal data leaks. Many smart devices require users’ location, contact details or access to cameras and microphones to set up, which expose people’s personal information, but are unnecessary to use the product. As a result, data breaches and security incidents continue to emerge worldwide through smartphone apps, smart speakers, TVs, air fryers and robot vacuums. Last week, another major data breach was added to the list: Mars Hydro, a Chinese company that makes Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as LED grow lights and the
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
RSS