Category: Relations -Sino-Taiwanese

That’s MISTER Ma, To The Likes Of You!

Wednesday's China Post relates the goal KMT chairman Wu Poh-Hsiung has in mind during his visit to Nanjing, China:

In particular, Wu wishes to persuade his Chinese Communist Party counterpart to get direct charter flights started between Taiwan and China [on] weekends [by] July 4.

But the Post's story leaves out the fact that Wu was so desperate to clinch the deal he couldn't bring himself to refer to his own country's newly-elected president as President Ma Ying-jeou.  Doing so would upset his hosts, who harbor territorial designs on Taiwan.

So "Mister Ma" it was, then!

“KMT Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) addressed President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) as ‘Mr. Ma’ during a banquet with Chinese Communist Party [CCP] officials on Monday night. This kind of behavior has me worried that he may have forgotten about Taiwan and its 23 million people,” Legislative Whip William Lai (賴清德) told a press conference.

One of the petulant displays of disrespect the KMT used to pay to Chen Shui-bian was to refer to him as "Mr." rather than "President" Chen.  It was, of course, their way of delegitimizing him – of pointedly insisting that they didn't accept Chen as the REAL president of Taiwan.

Fascinating then that the KMT now pays a president belonging to their OWN party the same discourtesy - and quite possibly with "Mr. Ma's" explicit blessing!

Question for the KMT:  If YOU no longer feel any particular need to call Ma Ying-jeou, "President," why should any of his political opponents back home feel obligated to do so?

Wednesday's Taipei Times continues:

. . . Deputy KMT caucus Secretary-General Wu Yu-sheng (吳育昇) downplayed the implication of Wu Poh-hsiung referring to Ma as “Mr” on Monday night.

Wu Yu-sheng said the KMT chairman’s comments reflected his intention to “put aside controversies and ensure mutual respect” for both sides of the Taiwan Strait.

Controversial?  What's controversial?  Ma Ying-jeou was elected president with 60% of the popular vote.  No one in Taiwan disputes the fact that he won (reasonably) fair and square.  Some folks may not like it, but that's a separate issue.

Speaking of mutual respect, while in China, will Taiwan's Wu Poh-hsiung similarly refer to Hu Jintao as "Mr. Hu"?  That would be a sign of mutual respect.  Or mutual disrespect.  Or whatever.

(Because if anyone deserves to be called "Mr." instead of "President", it's Hu Jintao.  Recall that Hu has never been elected village dogcatcher, much much less president of HIS country.)

But hey, at least Taiwan can take comfort in the fact that the KMT chairman wasn't in FULL kowtow mode.  For that, he'd have to take a page from Taiwan's servile press, which regularly refers to Ma's wife by her English chosen name.

Though with the KMT's self-imposed July 4th deadline for cross-strait flights rapidly approaching, how long will it be before party luminaries visiting China truckle to Beijing by addressing Taiwan's president with the diminutive "Mark"?

KMT chairman Ma Ying-jeou giving speech while standing at crotch-level in front of giant statue of dictator Chiang Kai-shek.

(Say hello to my leetle friend – Mark Ma between the legs of former dictator Chiang Kai-shek.  Image from the Taipei Times)

i-1

My Nominee For This Year’s Coveted “Asian Order Of The Brown Nose” Award

It's a tight race, but my current fave is Taiwan's David Ting, for his China Post column, Temblor's unsung heroes show the love of the people:

For all the losses, sufferings and agonies, Beijing can take some comfort from the fact that the earthquake has rallied the country behind the government, which has been constantly criticized by Western countries for human right abuses. Suddenly, such criticisms disappeared, thanks to the earthquake that prompted Premier Wen Jiabao and President Hu Jintao to respond instantly and effectively — an evidence of their care and concern for human rights.  [emphasis added]

Evidence of their care and concern for human rights.  Priceless!

An illustration of an Asian baby wearing green clothes with pink flowers on them poses for the prestigious award: the Asian Order Of The Brown Nose.

(Image from Not The South China Morning Post)

Had some Taiwanese friends over this week who've never seen the previous Indiana Jones movies, and I was a bit surprised when one of them brought the subject of the quake up.  Now, this guy and I almost never talk politics — I don't know his politics — don't CARE to know his politics. Be that as it may, he asked me, "So Foreigner, what do you think of the earthquake in China?"

Now, I was starting to think this was some kind of trick question.  50,000 people dead… what am I SUPPOSED to think?

Me:  "Uh, yeah . . . it's pretty bad.  What do YOU think?"

Him:  "I don't know.  We offered to send rescue teams over there.  But they refused."

Did I detect a sadness in that last word?  Or bitterness?  I'm no Betazoid, so I couldn't tell.  But no guff from HIM about the glorious, compassionate Communist Party leadership.  Just the implied criticism:  "They had tens of thousands of people trapped under rubble, and the stupid bastards REFUSED our rescue teams.  Nice that they're letting them in NOW, but it's kinda late, isn't it?"

The Weekly Standard featured a piece on the earthquake this week, minus Ting's obsequious cheerleading:

In the city of Dujiangyan, which is closest to the quake's epicenter, the UK's Guardian newspaper reports residents there furious over the shoddy workmanship and substandard materials used in many of the buildings that collapsed around their families. Many of them blame local officials for selling off the high quality materials that should have been used in these buildings and putting the money in their pockets. The same government functionaries then signed off on certifications that these structures were built according to local codes and ordnances, even thought that they knew them to be incapable of surviving even small tremors.

[…]

City residents were particularly angered by the collapse of the Juyuan High School, pointing out that this much newer building folded like a house of cards while considerably older structures–most conspicuously local PLA offices and other government buildings–were left standing.

"About 450 [students] were inside, in nine classes and it collapsed completely from the top to the ground. It didn't fall over; it was almost like an explosion . . . why isn't there money to build a good school for our kids?" shouted several at the site. "Chinese officials are too corrupt and bad. These buildings outside have been here for 20 years and didn't collapse–the school was only 10 years old. They took the money from investment, so they took the lives of hundreds of kids. They have money for prostitutes and second wives but they don't have money for our children. This is not a natural disaster–this is done by humans."

Something's seriously amiss when Chinese citizens are more critical of their government than members of the supposedly "free" press stationed in Taiwan.

POSTSCRIPT:  The good news is, Typepad has updated its WYSIWYG editor, giving bloggers like me several new functions to play with.  The bad news is it's as buggy as hell right now.  Hence the unposted photo.

Perhaps if the technical support staff at Typepad resolved to be a little more like the "unsung heroes of the Peoples' Liberation Army, working around the clock  under difficult conditions, demonstrating the kind of tenacity that shows they fear neither hardship nor death," the problems would be resolved, and I'd be able to post the image.

(Kidding! . . . Kidding, Typepad.  I kid, because I love.)

UPDATE (May 25/08):  Blogging software seems to be back to normal now.  Thanks fellas.

i-1

Disaster Aid: A Comparison

Although I wasn’t living in Taiwan during the September 21st earthquake that struck here in 1999, the China Post‘s recollection on Wednesday seemed at odds with what I had read about events following the disaster:

We also remember that in 1999, mainland China generously donated about US$3 million through its Red Cross organization to our own Red Cross.

$3 whole million?  Gee, divided by 1.3 BILLION people living in the People’s Republic of China, and that works out to . . . $0.002 per person.  Whoa, were the big spenders in Beijing able to fork it all out at once, or did they have to pay on an installment plan?

Fortunately, the Taipei Times recapped the REAL story on Thursday:

For many Taiwanese, the [1999 Taiwan] earthquake — with its more than 2,400 fatalities and tens of thousands of people left homeless — is still a vivid nightmare and one that is sure to be brought to the surface as images of the devastation in China begin to reach us via newspapers, TV and the Internet.

As humanitarian aid and rescue teams started arriving in Taiwan, Beijing exploited the disaster to score a few political points, requiring that all international relief including donations, food and rescue teams be channeled through China.

As the result of Beijing’s interference, timely rescue efforts were delayed, such as when a Russian rescue team could not land and refuel in China and had to take a longer route through Japan.

Not only did Beijing’s actions belie a lack of compassion for Taiwanese, it also created a number of logistical and quite unnecessary problems during the critical rescue window following the catastrophe.

The Times also gave us a glimpse at what generosity really looks like:

The government announced yesterday a cash donation of NT$700 million (US$22.6 million) and NT$100 million in rice, adding it would seek to collect NT$1.2 billion in donations from the private sector.

In other words, the Taiwanese government contribution alone totals about $1.00 U.S. PER PERSON living in this country.  (Which is 500 times what the Chinese government "generously" donated 9 years ago.)  An editorial cartoon from the Taipei Times sums up the situation rather well, I think.

Lowering Expectations

A few weeks ago, Taiwan’s China Post began to fret:  How could the country’s incoming KMT president bring voters back down to earth after he promised them the moon and stars from a speedy economic opening to China?

This week, we got our answer.  This week, President-elect Ma Ying-jeou decided to appoint a SACRIFICIAL LAMB in charge of the process — and a willing scapegoat from another party, to boot.  Now, when Ma’s overly-ambitious deadlines are not met, the stink of failure will cling to some OTHER political party, not Ma’s own.  And when that inevitable failure DOES come, Ma will appoint a KMT man to the position, then conveniently announce that he’s granting the new guy a more reasonable deadline.  (Because naturally, the new appointee needs more time to "fix the damage" after the previous office-holder "botched the job so horribly" during her brief tenure.)

In the immediate term however, Ma has to suffer some abuse from his own side.  (Although as Michael Turton points out, Ma will actually get brownie points for political "inclusiveness" in other quarters.)  KMT members are demanding to know why government jobs are going to fringe independence party members, and not themselves.  As if on cue, they now talk down the chances of a quick opening to China, saying Ma’s choice is unacceptable to Beijing — the equivalent of eating pork in front of a Muslim.

There’s no avoiding that.  Ma either takes a hit now for a single "poor personnel decision" or he takes a hit later for his unrealistic plans — and I think he prefers the former for face-saving reasons.  But for the while, Ma (and the rest of us) will just have to endure criticism in the form of purple prose such as this:

Ma should bear in mind that there were thousands of overseas Chinese from all four corners of the world who flew back to Taiwan on their own to vote for him, to pin their dreams on him for the return of the spring of hope after eight years of winter of despair. Their hearts are now bleeding, torn asunder by the sudden death of their dreams.  [emphasis added]

Oh dear GOD, make it stop! . . .

POSTSCRIPT:  I’m struck by the Post‘s characterization of Ms. Lai Shin-yuan, the new Mainland Affairs Commission chairman, as "a firebrand legislator".

Um, is it asking too much that if you call a virtual unknown like Lai a firebrand, that you at least BACK IT UP with some quotes or examples or something?

UPDATE (May 10/08):  Deadline?  What deadline?

President-elect Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) never made any announcements on the date cross-strait weekend charter flights would commence, nor did he promise to implement cross-strait weekend charter flights by July 4, Ma spokesman Lo Chih-chiang (羅智強) said yesterday.

Speaking of back-pedaling, the editors at Taiwan’s China Post must have received the memo from KMT Central Command:  Using Lai as our fall-guy (er, fall-gal) is something we’ll do when the July 4th TBA deadline is missed.  Back off – NOW.

And so, after spending 3 or 4 days blasting the woman last week (and lambasting Ma for nominating her), the Post made a dizzying about-face on Monday.  Why won’t everybody just Leave Lai Shing-yuan alone?, its editors asked.

Incredible.  First the the Post calls Lai a firebrand responsible for destroying "the spring of hope after eight years of winter of despair."  Then it called her nomination a betrayal:

But people with an average IQ fail to see any beauty from any angle. Ma defended his appointment by arguing that because there were 5.44 million people who did not vote for him, he has to "broaden the base of consensus." How strange is this argument? Is this the basis for betraying the 7.65 million who voted for him?

And after all that the folks at the China Post have the face to piously tell everyone ELSE to stop the witch hunt?

A Redshirt Proves That Whole ‘Goon And Thug’ Charge Wrong

A Beijing booster peacefully rises — and then kicks an unarmed man in the back.

A pro-CCP Chinese thug kicks an unarmed South Korean protester in the back during a rally against the Chinese Olympic torch relay.

(Image of Olympic Torch protest in Seoul, South Korea from the Taipei Times)

Remember:  These are the very same Chinese "students" Ma Ying-jeou, the KMT and the China Post want to import into Taiwan to have the run of the place. 

Of course, there’ll be no such problems here.  Never, ever, ever. 

What makes you think otherwise?

Postscript:  Think only Saddam Hussein or Al Qaeda use children as human shields?  Readers will receive only one guess as to who else does.

. . . the fierce display of nationalistic pride by a pro-Chinese crowd of up to 10,000 caught everyone [in Canberra] by surprise.

Ask Karuna Bajracharya, a 26-year-old Nepalese pro-Tibet supporter who now lives on the South Coast.

He says he was walking toward Parliament House when, "I saw a mob of Chinese men. They started yelling and hitting me with their flags.

"There was a father with his son who was about five or six years old and the kid was hitting me. His father actually said to him, ‘Keep hitting him.’

"Then he said to me, ‘if you don’t like it, hit him in the head’. He wanted me to hit his son, so he could retaliate and the whole thing could get out of hand."  [emphasis added]

(Hat tip to China Rises)

UPDATE (Apr 29/08):  Anyone notice the hypocrisy here:

China’s oft-repeated mantra is that human rights are a domestic issue and other countries should not interfere in domestic politics . . .

China buses in its students to participate in pro-Olympic torch demonstrations in America, Australia, Japan and Korea.  Its mobs also use intimidation and force against anti-torch protesters who happen to be CITIZENS of those countries.

But can foreign students organize themselves to protest the torch on Chinese soil?  ‘Course not — that’d be interfering in domestic politics!

UPDATE (May 4/08):  More on the victim here.

i-1

The War’s Over. We Lost.

You just gotta figure some Taiwanese are thinking that after seeing the photo on page 19 of Wednesday’s China Post.  The caption reads, ". . . mainland Chinese property tycoons [are guided] through land for sale on an old [Taiwanese] military base yesterday."  [emphasis added]

The exact photo that appeared in the print version isn’t online, but the Post‘s web version includes three other related shots, so that’s cool.

Less cool is this obsequious description in the third paragraph:

Included in the group are a number of self-made billionaires who have cashed in on China’s breakneck economic growth over the past decade. 

Self-made like characters in a Horatio Alger story, they are.  Always inspirational to hear about Communist Party princelings who’ve managed to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, leaving behind their former lives of privation and want.

** Irony Alert **

1999:  China trashes the Falun Gong sect, calling it, "An evil cult."

2000:  Beijing vilifies Taiwanese Vice-President Annette Lu as, "The scum of the nation."

2006:  The PRC blasts Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian as, "A destroyer of peace."

2008:  The Chinese government labels the Dalai Lama, "A wolf in monk’s robes.  A devil with a human face, but the heart of a beast."

*
*

But the icing on the cake?  A headline on the front page of Monday’s Taipei Times:  "Media ‘demonizes’ China, Beijing’s UK envoy says"

LOL

Towards A Chinese Commonwealth: Putting Taiwan’s Head In The Noose

Agreeing to the One-China policy isn’t enough; Taiwan has to agree to eventual "reunification" with the PRC.  That’s Joe Hung from his column, Ma said he would sign peace accord:

Ma Ying-jeou’s "three-no" stance on relations between Taiwan and China cannot meet the fundamental requirement of Beijing "one China" principle as set forth in the consensus of 1992.  Ma wants "no" independence for Taiwan, "no" force of arms used across the Strait and "no" change in the status quo.  He has to add "eventual unification" to the trinity to dispel Beijing’s suspicion.

Just how would the KMT president sell surrender to the Taiwanese?

As a non-Hoklo president, Ma may feel it difficult to make that pronouncement.  He does not want to expose himself to independence activists who will charge him with selling out Taiwan to China.  But he can easily neutralize any venomous attack by telling the Hoklo-Hakka majority that he visualizes relations between Taiwan and China in the future as those between Great Britain and Canada, or Australia or New Zealand.

These former British colonies, in the words of the Pronouncement of the Imperial Conference of 1926, are "autonomous communities within the British Empire, equal in status, in no way subordinate one to another in any aspect of their domestic or external affairs, though united by a common allegiance to the Crown and freely associated as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations."  Internationally, these communities were recognized as separate states, entitled to have separate representation in the League of Nations and other world organizations, to appoint their own ambassadors, and to conclude their own treaties.  [emphasis added]

A similar arrangement can be made for Taiwan to be unified with China in the name of the Chinese nation.  That commits Taiwan to Beijing’s fundamental "one China" principle.

Whoa, whoa, whoa.  Let’s take a look at the part I’ve underlined, and put that into a "Chinese  Commonwealth" context:  These Chinese polities…are autonomous communities within the Chinese nation, equal in status, in no way subordinate to another in any aspect of their domestic or external affairs, though united by a common allegiance to One China and freely associated…

1)  Taiwan and China would be equal in status in this hypothetical Commonwealth?  Really now.

2)  Taiwan would NOT be subordinate in Hung’s wonderful fantasy land?  Uh-huh.

3)  The Chinese Commonwealth would be a FREE association?  Joe, put down that opium pipe!

Because the British Commonwealth is a free association, Australia has the liberty to LEAVE it.  Likewise, Canada can withdraw any damn time it wants to.  And New Zealand?  Why, tiny New Zealand can pack its bags TOMORROW, and not a single missile will be fired upon it in anger by a vengeful Great Britain.

Taiwan free to exit a Chinese Commonwealth?  Ehhh, not so much – and no amount of "visualization" on Ma Ying-jeou’s part will ever change that.  The plain facts are that while the British Commonwealth is a voluntary organization, Joe Hung’s Chinese Commonwealth would be a prison with no escape.  To suggest otherwise is to grossly misrepresent the world in which we live.

(One other hitch:  The British Commonwealth can EXPEL members for human rights violations.  Does Hung imply that mighty Taiwan will have the power to cast China out of his Commonwealth for, I dunno let’s say, another Tiananmen massacre or further barbarism in Tibet?)

New readers might want to take a look at a post about this I wrote a couple of years ago.  A bit wordy perhaps, but it still holds up.  You can read it – or you can skip it.  That’s FREEDOM.  Quite a different thing from being handed a Little Red Book at gunpoint and being ordered to memorize it in a Chinese re-education camp.

Freedom and compulsion.  Voluntary association and involuntary servitude.  Sadly, Joe Hung seems to believe these things are all one and the same.

Used Sesame Seed Salesmen

From Monday’s China Post:

Someone, apparently a fanatic fan of Jolin Tsai, has paid NT$40,200 [roughly $1,200 US] to get 23 sesame seeds she was alleged to have dropped off on a paper napkin while she was munching her Kentucky Fried Chicken burger, the United Daily News reported yesterday.

[…]

But [the pop singer] denied through her agent she never ate at the chicken-burger outlet as was claimed. "It’s a fake," Jolin was quoted by her agent as saying. "They (the sesame seeds) are not mine. I never visited that Kentucky Fried Chicken outlet."

Nice work if you can get it, I guess.  Now she knows how Koo Chen-fu feels.  Koo can insist the 1992 Consensus is a fake all he likes, but the KMT STILL sells it over his objections.

I never visited that Kentucky Fried Chicken outlet indeed.