- 1
- 2
Why Anger The Dragon?
The DPP's Hsieh has tried to stoke such fears with negative attacks, portraying Ma as disloyal to Taiwan. But there are signs that the identity card is waning in force. After eight years of misrule by the local-born Chen, many Taiwanese are simply sick of him and his party. Restrictions on cross-strait investment and travel have hindered Taiwanese firms' ability to cash in on China's boom, and Chen's inflammatory moves—such as his recent plan to hold a referendum on rejoining the United Nations under the name "Taiwan" (as opposed to the "Republic of China")—have strained relations with Beijing and Washington to the limit. With incomes stagnant and inflation on the rise, even many DPP supporters are now ready to jump ship. Wang Cheng-kun, the director of the doctors' association in Tainan, a DPP stronghold, recently endorsed Ma, in part because he was put off by what he saw as Hsieh's smear attacks and fearmongering. Wang also says he admires Ma's clean character and more-global outlook. "I've always been a [DPP] supporter, and I was afraid my friends wouldn't forgive me for my change of heart," Wang said. "But Taiwan must internationalize; we shouldn't isolate ourselves."
As well as a victory for Ma, a KMT win would also represent a triumph for China's President Hu. In years past, Beijing repeatedly drove islanders into the independence camp with its fiery rhetoric and ham-handed military threats. But in the past five years, it has adopted a much more nuanced strategy. "Under Hu's leadership, Beijing's approach has become more patient, less inclined to saber-rattling, and more self-restrained," wrote cross-strait security expert Lin Chong-pin in a recent essay. True, China has ratcheted up the threats against Chen and other pro-independence diehards. But it's also launched a charm offensive targeting both the KMT leadership and the DPP's base. One recent carrot: a relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese doctors—a traditional pillar of DPP support—working on the mainland. And on March 4, Hu repeated his offer for peace talks with Taiwan under the "one China" condition, even offering to meet those who'd backed independence in the past if they moderated their views.
Such overtures appear to be paying off; it's harder for pro-independence politicians like Hsieh to whip up anti-China sentiment while Beijing holds out olive branches. Still, a Ma victory wouldn't end cross-strait tensions entirely. As president, he would have to avoid looking like a sellout to the 77 percent of islanders who still favor some sort of independence from Beijing or the political status quo. "Ma [must] take a slow, gentle pace in improving cross-strait relations," says political analyst Liao Da-chi. "I don't think there will be a dramatic change—each side will be very cautious."
What this means is that Ma is likely to emphasize the strengthening of economic links. A major political breakthrough remains unlikely: Ma himself has said it probably won't occur in his lifetime. At most, Beijing and Taipei will put aside, rather than resolve, the thorny issue of Taiwan's permanent status. So the island will remain in limbo, a territory claimed by China but effectively independent. Yet like it or not, Taiwan's and China's economies are now connected at the hip—giving both sides a strong incentive for warmer relations. In that sense, it's good news that both Ma and Hsieh have pledged to take an open-minded approach to Beijing. Whoever wins, pragmatism has already triumphed.
With Ko Shu-Ling in Taipei
© 2008
- 1
- 2
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: scrapp331 @ 03/24/2008 2:44:20 AM
Comment: Living and working in Taiwan does not equat to understanding Taiwan -- neither does many years of listening to propaganda from one side or the other. You're obviously on the DPP side and believe what they tell you. My comments were that you do not know Jonathan, you do not know the background research that he has done for the article, the people he has interviewed, his understanding of Mandarin, Taiwanese or other languages and the culture of Taiwan. Jonathan has in fact criticized the KMT in many of his other articles -- so to say that he does not know how to publicly criticize the KMT makes your points moot. Individual corruptions in the DPP while in office have significance, while allegations that Ma's wife stole a newspaper in another country and without any consequence to Taiwan at the time (vs money sponsored by public taxes) is not of the same significance. Just because one does not agree with your opinion and viewpoint does not mean they have not done deep thinking or critical analysis. Sometimes being mired too deep into the island's politics causes some to miss the big picture -- which Taiwanese voters delivered this past weekend, supporting everything Jonathan wrote is his article. So, care to retract your comments that he did not know what he was talking about?
As for Jonathan not "understand[ing] how the surveys are conducted, publicized and interpreted plus how people living under KMT respond to survey", I quote one of his other articles, which clearly indicates he truly understands the issue: "But publicly available polls in Taiwan have a credibility problem. Many are conducted by partisan media outlets and have proved unreliable."
To state that the KMT controls everything, from mass media, to school systems, to civil service, etc, is then ignoring the work the DPP has done over the past eight years, and also conveniently ignores mass media such as the Liberty Times and FTV (??????). You attacked Jonathan for not doing his background research and not understanding the issues -- rather it is you who did not do your research on Jonathan or understanding, and just used your politicized opinion to try and justify your attacks. I am not Taiwanese, cannot vote, and do not have any local political affiliation. I just hate when people such as yourself try to pull a "holier than thou" kind of argument and assume that because someone doesn't share your opinions, they know nothing on the subject. As the old saying goes, when you "assume" you make an "A-S-S" out of "U", but this time not "ME", nor Jonathan for that matter.
Posted By: Diaoan Lang @ 03/21/2008 11:59:48 PM
Comment: Living and working in Taiwan for many years does not equate understanding Taiwan. Most of the Chinese who moved to Taiwan after World War II don't know anything about the island. Most of the people who grow up in the school system in Taiwan don't know Taiwan because they are not taught in the school system when they were growing up and they are scared to question.
Living under the Chinese monopoly of mass communication, shool system, civil services, law enforcement system, and the judicial system most people have learned not to question, not to express opinions and not to object. Echoing the information from Taiwan without probing is what the Taiwanese were taught. The reporters in Taiwan tend to do it everyday. Have you heard of any KMT members examining the KMT? They are generally scared to do so. It is amazing that a Newsweek reporter does the same.
A person without the experiences of refraining from publicly criticizing KMT would not comprehend how the system work. Reporting based on the public information in Taiwan without probing is a sign of betraying the journalism of free world.
Brainwashing and smear campaign are generally the trademarks of Chinese politics, both in China and in Taiwan.
If individual corruptions in the DPP teams is critical then the allegation that Ma's wife stole a newspaper from library would have similar significance. It takes much more deep thinking to comprehend the politics of Taiwan.
I expect good magazine like Newsweek to spread wisdom rather than campaigning for one side.
Posted By: Diaoan Lang @ 03/21/2008 11:37:36 PM
Comment: Livng and working in Taiwan does not mean a person will have a clear mind. Increasing number of people growing up in Taiwan echoing KMT's propaganda slowly learn to question KMT and the words in their media. If Jonathan intend to do genuine journalism he would include the facts before he made the inferences and judgment. He would need to observe the changing of content and the number and he would have to understand how the surveys are conducted, publicized and interpreted plus how people living under KMT respond to survey. Under Chinese influence people learn not to tell the truth to survive. Many of those who migrate to USA from Taiwan learn to drop the old habit of echoing the KMT propaganda and slowly learn to express opinions and question the mass media. Has anyone heard of any KMT members examining their leaders? KMT has been monopolizing the mass media, the shool system, the civil srvice system, and the judicial system. Talking about smear campaign, that is a key trademark of KMT.
People who has not refrained from echoing KMT would neve understand this.