EDITORIAL: Blue-green
fault line weakens Taiwan
Taiwan is one of very few countries about which it can be said that it faces a
threat to its survival. Given this, decisionmakers should ensure that resources
and energy are properly channeled to meet any challenge head-on. Unfortunately,
that is not always the case.
Israel¡¦s situation is analogous to Taiwan¡¦s: Both are threatened by an external
enemy bent on denying them the right to exist and which have shown determination
to use force to achieve that end. Granted, the analogy only goes this far, as
the dynamics of power in the two conflicts differ markedly. In Taiwan¡¦s case, it
is the weaker party in the struggle, while Israel in its struggle has the upper
hand militarily and is an occupying force, which generates a whole new set of
grievances.
That being said, the threat facing Israel is no less serious and its gravity has
served as a rallying force for its people. There are undeniably serious
differences of opinion inside Israel about how to deal with the challenges
created by the Palestinians¡¦ right to self-determination or attacks against
Israelis by groups like Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Israel¡¦s
democratic way of life has helped bring those differences into contrast.
However, all Israelis, from those who support the use of force to resolve the
conflict to those who regard the occupation as the main cause of the conflict,
agree on the need to do what is necessary to ensure the survival of their
nation.
This is an example that Taiwanese appear unwilling to follow. This can perhaps
be explained by the fact that violence against Taiwan, apart from the 1995-1996
Missile Crisis, remains abstract, despite its formidable military foe across the
Taiwan Strait. Consequently, the green-blue political schism continues to
fracture the nation, a situation that bears great dangers when facing an
external enemy. Aside from fostering disunity, the endless domestic battles over
electricity price increases and imports of US beef, for example, take the
government¡¦s and political parties¡¦ focus and resources away from productive
issues.
Fueling this is the view, held by a number of people in the pan-green camp, that
President Ma Ying-jeou (°¨^¤E) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) are trying
to ¡§sell¡¨ Taiwan to China, a contention that holds little water once one has
made the effort to actually talk with KMT members, their supporters and civil
servants.
Despite all his flaws, Ma is not a dictator and could not be one even if he
wanted to. He is part of a government, and Taiwan¡¦s democratic system, flaws
notwithstanding, imposes checks and balances on what he and his administration
can do. The KMT has flouted democratic rules on a number of issues in the past
four years, but it is hard to imagine it could get away with using
¡§authoritarian¡¨ means to alter the fundamentals of Taiwan. Not even those who
gave Ma a second mandate in January would allow him to do so.
Rather than launch attacks on what is regarded as the ¡§proximate¡¨ enemy, the
pan-green camp would be far more effective if it sought to establish
constructive relationships with officials in the pan-blue camp who have the same
democratic values and pride in Taiwan as they do, in an effort to focus on the
one external force that can truly dissolve the nation: China.
There are potentially large, untapped resources in the pan-blue camp where the
pan-green camp could make inroads if it tried. Such efforts would have far
better chances of protecting the nation by presenting China with a united front,
instead of spending nights in the legislature playing with furniture to prevent
a vote on amendments on what are, in the end, mundane ¡X and some would say
inevitable ¡X issues.
For Israelis, the threat is clear enough that they have little patience for
clownish behavior in their parliament. Taiwanese are playing with fire if they
think that their situation is any different.
|