In the second televised presidential debate, New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜), the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) presidential candidate, said that the “sacred mountain protecting the nation” (護國神山) in cross-strait relations is the “Republic of China [ROC] Constitution.”
Hou also vowed to apply the so-called “1922 consensus” to cross-strait issues. He wants to use the Constitution to buttress the “1992 consensus” and parrot China’s line of calling the “consensus” the “anchor” of cross-strait relations.
Hou and his running mate, Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), have decided to follow in former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) footsteps, doing and saying anything to please the Chinese government. From recognizing the “1992 consensus” and the “one China” principle, opposing Taiwanese independence, proposing to restart talks on the cross-strait service trade agreement, allowing students from China to work while studying in Taiwan, refusing to internationalize cross-strait economy and trade, and abolishing the conscription reform program, all of these policies have been nothing but actions to please Beijing, while the Constitution is used to cover up for their brazen, shameless agenda. Nevertheless, Hou seems to be missing several fundamental issues.
First, China has been sparing no effort to entice Taiwan to walk into the “one China” trap, so that when Taipei and Beijing both claim that “we are ‘one China’ pivoting toward unification,” the international community would lose its interest in China’s threat against Taiwan or even refrain from exercising measures to prevent Beijing from annexing the nation.
Hou seems to ignore that the majority of Taiwanese reject the “1992 consensus” and that its acceptance puts Taiwan in great jeopardy. In the unification agenda laid out by China, there has never been space for the ROC or Taiwan, or the precious democracy that our predecessors fought for. The “1992 consensus” is the “uncanny valley” tailor-made for Taiwan. Is Hou aware of the significance of his endorsement and how it could affect national interests, or is he merely being manipulated by deep-blue and pro-China supporters?
Second, as Hou said that the ROC Constitution is the “sacred mountain protecting the nation,” his “mentor” Ma had already quoted the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China during his visit to China.
Despite being a former president, Ma made the ludicrous remark: “Taiwan is an inseparable part of Chinese territory, has never been a country and can never become a country.”
It is a pity that Ma has sunk so low, but it is even more baffling why Hou would want to adopt his stance.
If the Constitution is the “sacred mountain protecting the nation” in Hou’s mind, should not he, to use his favorite phrase, “completely clamp down on” those traitors that auction off our national sovereignty and send the wrong message to the world?
Last, Hou said that Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Vice President William Lai’s (賴清德) Taiwanese independence stance is an insurmountable barrier lying in front of cross-strait stability. Who does he exactly have in mind for being the culprit of sabotaging peace and warmongering? The DPP or the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)?
China’s military aggression against Taiwan, or the entire Indo-pacific region, has been acknowledged by the international community as a major source of threat.
The only party that has been undermining peace is China, while the KMT only sings to the CCP’s tune and does not utter a word of protest, and even urges Taiwanese not to fight for their independence, not to strengthen ties with the US or support the DPP’s national defense mentality.
If there is an insurmountable barrier, it is nothing but China’s autocratic rule and contempt of democracy as well as the KMT’s obsequiousness to the CCP that are undermining cross-strait peace. If a presidential candidate cannot tell who is the real culprit threatening cross-strait peace and regional security, how do we expect such a candidate to safeguard our democracy and freedom?
Jethro Wang is a former secretary at the Mainland Affairs Council.
Translated by Rita Wang
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
After the coup in Burma in 2021, the country’s decades-long armed conflict escalated into a full-scale war. On one side was the Burmese army; large, well-equipped, and funded by China, supported with weapons, including airplanes and helicopters from China and Russia. On the other side were the pro-democracy forces, composed of countless small ethnic resistance armies. The military junta cut off electricity, phone and cell service, and the Internet in most of the country, leaving resistance forces isolated from the outside world and making it difficult for the various armies to coordinate with one another. Despite being severely outnumbered and
RSS