|
The Liberty Times
Editorial: Taiwan can learn from Dalai Lama
The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) autocratic regime has long nurtured a hope
that the Tibetan independence movement will wither away and die when the Tibetan
political and spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, dies and leaves the movement
without a leader.
However, on March 25, the Tibetan parliament-in-exile accepted the Dalai Lama’s
resignation from his political duties. Based on his concern for the long-term
interests of the Tibetan people, the Dalai Lama has said repeatedly in recent
years that the Tibetan independence movement is mature enough to elect its
political leaders.
Tibetan writer Tsering Woeser has said that when the Dalai Lama hands some of
his traditional powers to a newly elected prime minister to head the Tibetan
government-in-exile, that will be a matter of great significance — both to the
institution of the Dalai Lama and to Tibetan tradition.
Indeed, by seeking to democratize the Tibetan independence movement, the Dalai
Lama has raised a new challenge to China.
With this transformation, the movement will be able to continue even without the
Dalai Lama. A democratic Tibetan government-in-exile will increase pressure on
the Chinese government, which has continually persecuted Tibetans, and it will
also motivate more Tibetans to support democracy and self rule.
The dynamics of the Tibetan independence movement offer a point of reflection
for the people of Taiwan. Chinese writer Yuan Hongbing (袁紅冰) has criticized the
Taiwanese government, saying it still has a long way to go in terms of real
democracy, since the incumbent government dares not touch on the sensitive issue
of political independence.
What makes a real democracy? In a real democracy, people are given opportunities
to express their opinions. They elect public representatives and vote in
referendums, all according to well-known and transparent democratic processes.
It requires a sound system for the rule of law to operate properly, and in the
case of Taiwan it is already broadly accepted that the public should have the
right to determine its own future.
In the past, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government declared its
belief that sovereignty lies with the people, allowing the public to participate
as much as possible in the development of Taiwan. At the time, the issue was
hotly debated and efforts were also made to seek UN membership.
However, this trend has been largely reversed since the election of President Ma
Ying-jeou (馬英九) in 2008, hence Yuan’s criticism .
In fact, it is a gross understatement to say that the Ma administration is
afraid to address the issue of independence. It is not just afraid to bring up
the subject, it has even submitted to China’s will by fabricating the so-called
“1992 consensus” and stating that both Taiwan and China belong to “one China.”
In terms of policy, the government spares no effort in its attempts to link
Taiwan with China. Although Ma keeps saying that he will not sell anything but
Taiwanese fruit, he has been complicit in helping Beijing annex Taiwan.
Compared with the Dalai Lama’s vision and foresight when it comes to the Tibetan
independence movement, Ma’s pro-Chinese stance shows his disregard for
democracy. Even more absurdly, pressured by China, Ma even refused to let the
Dalai Lama visit Taiwan.
Meanwhile, Ma’s “diplomatic truce” has led to a new model in which Taiwan’s
participation in international organizations requires approval from Beijing, as
if Taiwan were a Chinese vassal state. Is it any wonder that the Philippines
thought nothing of deporting suspected Taiwanese criminals to China?
Furthermore, Chinese threats deprived Taiwanese of their right to hold a
referendum on the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) before it was
signed by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the CCP last year.
Under the Ma administration, it has become clear that the government now
requires China’s approval before it will let the Taiwanese public exercise the
right to hold a referendum.
Given all the Chinese capital flowing into Taiwan and the flamboyant Chinese
philanthropist Chen Guangbiao (陳光標) handing out cash, one has to wonder if such
moves are not a covert way of paving the way for the China-leaning KMT to win
the upcoming elections?
On the eve of the 2008 presidential election, Ma issued a statement condemning
the CCP for conducting a military clampdown in Tibet and demanded that the
Chinese government initiate talks with the Dalai Lama.
The Tibetan independence movement continues to grow with the Dalai Lama mapping
out a visionary strategy for its future, whereas Ma, now singing the same tune
as Beijing, sees the Dalai Lama as a “troublemaker.”
Ma also said that Taiwan’s future should be decided by Taiwanese and that “all
23 million Taiwanese hope to return to the UN and we will continue to work
toward that goal.”
All these promises have come to naught, disappointing his supporters.
Sticking to Ma’s goal of eventual reunification, Taiwan is destined to gradually
lose its sovereignty and become more and more like a provincial Chinese
government, as a result of which Taiwanese democracy will regress to the same
low standards we see in China.
It is tragic to see Taiwan’s hard-won democracy being so willfully destroyed by
Ma. Democracy is like the air we breathe: We pay it no heed in normal times, but
as soon as we don’t have it, we suffocate.
The next presidential election is a crucial moment, one when the people of
Taiwan must stand up and defend democracy. If we make the same mistake as in
2008, then Taiwanese democracy will by thoroughly undermined; the White Terror
era will return, perhaps followed closely by a period of Red Terror from across
the Taiwan Strait.
Once that happens it is only a matter of time before the Chinese military
suppression of Tibet will be replayed in Taiwan.
TRANSLATED BY LIU YI-HSIN
|
