Ma must step away from Taiwan abyss
Written by Writer on Monday, November 10th, 2008
Ma must step away from Taiwan abyss
Taiwan News
2008-11-10 12:43 AM
President Ma Ying-jeou and his right-wing Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang) administration would be well advised to accept a proposal by opposition Democratic Progressive Party Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen for talks with the opposition to ease Taiwan’s intensifying crisis of democracy.
The DPP chairwoman floated her offer during a news conference at her party headquarters Saturday to review the events surrounding last week’s five-day controversial visit to Taiwan by People’s Republic of China envoy Chen Yun-lin, chairman of Beijing’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait, ostensibly for meetings with Taiwan counterpart Strait Exchange Foundation Chairman Chiang Pin-kun.
Tsai observed that the overall result of the protests was “a victory for the Taiwan people” since the direct actions of thousands of Taiwan citizens compelled Ma to reaffirm for the first time in nearly nine months the principle that “only the Taiwan people can decide the future of Taiwan” and thus preempted Beijing’s plan to use Chen Yunlin’s visit to manifest the PRC’s effective suzerainty over Taiwan and denigrate Ma and our democratically-elected government.
In the face of charges by Ma and KMT lawmakers that she is responsible for all the “violence” in the past week, Tsai correctly observed that the outpouring of tens of thousands of people of all walks of life into the streets was “not a face-off between the opposition party and the ruling party but resistence by the people” against the Ma government’s hollowing-out of Taiwan’s sovereignty and its grossly improper attempt to ensure that the visiting envoy from an authoritarian and hostile PRC regime “did not see or hear any protests” from the Taiwan people.
Tsai also noted that much of the anger that exploded in the streets of the capital reflected deep anxiety over the monopolisation of cross-strait decision making by the party-to-party channel of the KMT and the PRC’s ruling Chinese Communist Party beyond legislative, media and citizen oversight that has taken the power to decide Taiwan’s future out of the hands of the 23 million Taiwan people and given it to the leaders of these two authoritarian parties.
Besides calling for the cessation of the illegitimate KMT-CCP forum, Tsai urged Ma to fulfill his own responsibility to “protect sovereignty and unify the people” and said she would be willing develop consultative channels with the Ma government under this condition.
We believe that Tsai’s offer was motivated by a sincere desire to prevent Taiwan society from falling into a divisive and destabilizing spiral of KMT “state violence” and “street resistence.”
Unfortunately, we fear that Tsai’s offer may prove to be naive because dragging Taiwan into a chaotic situation that could justify the reimposition of authoritarian rule may well be exactly what is desired by the PRC’s ruling Chinese Communist Party and hardliners in the KMT under its genuine leader “honorary” chairman Lien Chan.
Demonizing the opposition
Indeed, it was not surprising that news media yesterday reported that the Taipei City police department plans to subpoena the DPP chairwoman on possible charges of violating the restrictive Assembly and Parade Law, which Ma himself promised to liberalize during his election campaign.
Certainly, hardliners in the KMT are eager to demonize the “little dragon lady” into “Ing-wen the Violent,” just as the KMT regime demonized Shih Ming-teh and other democratic movement leaders into “violent” seditionists after the December 10, 1979 “Formosa” Incident in Kaohsiung City.
However, such martial law era tactics are likely to backfire, in part because Tsai’s shy demeanor and scholarly image is “just too far removed” from the sobriquet of “Ing-wen the Violent.”
Moreover, the Ma’s KMT government bears prime responsibility for its ham-fisted drive to deprive our citizens of their constitutionally guaranteed rights and for its excessive and impatient use of police violence, in stark contrast to the tolerance shown by the former DPP government to two extended occupations of Ketegalan Boulevard and even the Taipei Main Station by tens of thousands of protestors in March-April 2004 and September-November 2006.
Any legal action against Tsai for violating an arguably unconstitutional law would ensure her a role as Taiwan’s new democratic political martyr and further reduce the political and moral legitimacy of the Ma government, even among Taiwan citizens who supported him but who did not intend that their ballots would turn into a mandate for the reimposition of a police state.
Ma and other KMT leaders should also consider how any criminal action against the leader of Taiwan’s opposition for upholding human rights will play internationally.
We do not claim to know what Mr Ma wants but,unless he wishes to be completely sidelined by the KMT-CCP alliance, he should carefully consider his next step and take the initiative to open consultations with the DPP and other social forces for a viable and consensus based cross-strait policy and lead Taiwan society away from the edge of the abyss on which we all now stand.
