The Lien Hu Summit II
Boy, are those Grapes ever Sour!
April 20, 2006
Editorial: The man who sold Taiwan, twice
So former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman Lien Chan has wrapped up his second trip to [mainland] China. Apart from helping this sad and aloof figure secure some kind of political legacy, it is hard to see what this latest trip has actually achieved.
Taipei Times, April 18, 2006
The Taipei Times is the English language mouthpiece for the Taiwan independence movement. Unfortunately, for an English language mouthpiece, the Taipei Times’ English isn’t terribly impressive. In case you’re still frowning in puzzlement over the Taipei Times’ “Chinglish,” or “Chinese English,” what the learned editors of the Taipei Times meant to say was not that Lien Chan “sold” Taiwan, but that Lien Chan “sold out” Taiwan. Excuse me, “sold out Taiwan, twice.” [ ! ]
Perhaps “Chinglish” is not the right word. Since Taiwan independence Quislings are so loath to think of themselves as Chinese, and so eager to think of themselves as “Japanese, Second Class,” perhaps I should refer to their laughably poor English not as “Chinglish,” but as “Engrish,” i.e., Japanese English.
But leaving their lack of English proficiency aside for the moment and returning to the main point: Were the grapes ever more sour?
The reason the grapes are so sour, is that Taiwan independence Quislings, Chen Shui-bian in particular, have suffered four major humiliations in a row.
First, the Bush II administration gave its unruly puppet regime on Taiwan a slap in the face, a slap so hard it was heard across the Pacific.
A Slap heard across the Pacific: The US Hegemon disciplines its Unruly Taiwan Puppet
Second, in order to punish “that SOB” (Bush II’s term for Chen Shui-bian), and put him in his place, the Bush II administration rolled out the red carpet for KMT Chairman and 2008 ROC presidential front-runner Ma Ying-jeou.
Third, CCP General Secretary Hu Jintao rolled out the red carpet for Honorary KMT Chairman Lien Chan and his entourage of over one hundred industrial magnates, representing an estimated 48% of the Taiwan region’s GDP. Among the rich and famous Taiwan-based CEOs who stood around half an hour for the honor of having their picture taken with Hu Jintao were Deep Green benefactors of the Taiwan independence movement.
Fourth, Microsoft, Boeing, Starbucks, and the Governor of Washington have just rolled out the red carpet for mainland Chinese National Secretary Hu Jintao, according him A List VIP treatment. Chen meanwhile, will probably be denied transit rights on the US mainland during his upcoming “state visits” to sundry banana republics in central and south America.
“Sad and aloof figure?” Hardly. Despite the fact that Lien Chan is merely an Honorary KMT Chairman, he is demonstrating more cross-Straits leadership and is contributing more to the economic survival of Taiwan’s economy than the entire Chen regime, the entire DPP, the entire Pan Green camp.
No, “Sad and aloof figure” is not the word. Unless of course the Taipei Times is referring not to Lien Chan, but to a self-marginalized lame duck Chen Shui-bian, cowering in fear from the Chinese people on Taiwan behind newly installed bulletproof panels inside the Presidential Palace.
But boy, are those grapes ever sour!
Let’s review the Taipei Times’ heavy-handed Taiwan independence media spin control, and subject it to systematic, point by point Reality Checks.
Taiwan Independence Media Spin Control: Chinese President Hu Jintao’s offer of talks based on the “one China” principle was nothing but the same stale produce that has been on the table for the last six years, wrapped up in fresh packaging. Hu made his latest offer safe in the knowledge that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government would reject it out of hand. President Chen Shui-bian has been vilified in the Chinese media as the arch splittist and has become public enemy No. 1 since former president Lee Teng-hui retired. So there was no way that Hu would make an offer if he thought for a minute that Chen would accept it. If China was really interested in talking to Chen, it could have done so long ago.
Reality Check: The CCP’s policy regarding Taiwan has never wavered since 1949, when it wrested control of the Chinese mainland from the KMT. It has certainly not changed during the six years Chen has been squatting in the ROC Presidential Palace. Nor has the KMT’s. Both the CCP and the KMT have maintained since time immemorial that there is only One China, and that both the mainland and Taiwan are integral parts of that One China. The only disagreement between the CCP and KMT has been over which of two rival governments is the legitimate ruler of that One China.
The Taipei Times casts the CCP and KMT’s unwavering defense of the territorial integrity of the Chinese nation, as defined in both their constitutions, as “Nothing but the same stale produce that has been on the table for six years, wrapped up in fresh packaging.” If that’s the case, what pray tell would constitute “fresh produce?” Endless waffling? Repeated reneging? Flagrant betrayal of one’s sworn commitment to “Five Noes?” Is it even necessary to dignify such an “argument” with a rebuttal?
The Taipei Times editors write:
“So there was no way that Hu would make an offer if he thought for a minute that Chen would accept it. If China was really interested in talking to Chen, it could have done so long ago.”
In other words, according to the Taipei Times, Hu is a big fat liar who’s merely bluffing, whereas Taiwan independence Quislings are straight shooters who mean what they say and say what they mean.
But didn’t these same editors openly gloat only two weeks ago that Chen had shrewdly run a number on Ma Ying-jeou and Hu Jintao, deftly jerking them around? As they put it in an April 6, 2006 editorial entitled “Chen’s smart challenge to Beijing”:
“President Chen Shui-bian on Monday told Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou that he would “absolutely respect” the idea of “one China with each side having its own interpretation if Chinese President Hu Jintao were to openly declare that the so-called “1992 consensus” means just that … Chen has thrown the ball squarely back into China’s court … Chen’s challenge to Hu also carries a risk … What if Hu … were to accept? How will the DPP administration respond … Although Chen had carefully phrased his challenge — the word “respect” is not tantamount to “accept” — the president should nonetheless be cautious …”
Are you getting a sense of why honest observers of Taiwan’s political scene, Chinese and westerner alike, eventually wind up feeling nothing but undiluted contempt for the Taiwan independence movement and its media spin controllers?
Taiwan Independence Media Spin Control: Besides that, the communists tossed a few more crumbs onto the table in the guise of help for Taiwanese fishermen, farmers and other groups, in a blatant attempt to erode the DPP’s support base. It’s certain that there will be no positive achievements from Lien’s trip. After all, what government would honor an agreement that their traitorous opposition had signed with a country that has 800 missiles trained on it?
Reality Check: Actually, the benefits the “communists” granted Chinese fishermen, farmers, and other groups on Taiwan were substantial enough to get the Taipei Times’ panties in a bunch. The reason the benefits weren’t more substantial, was that anything more would have required the cooperation of the obdurate Quisling Chen regime. The “communists,” as the Pan Greens are fond of calling Beijing’s capitalists in red clothing, were only able to offer those benefits that could be conferred unilaterally. Having denied Chinese fishermen, farmers, and other groups far more substantial benefits through their obstructionism, the Taiwan independence Quislings now want to blame the CCP for not offering more.
The Taipei Times denounces the CCP’s “blatant attempt to erode the DPP’s support base,” as if we are supposed to be outraged. Of course the CCP’s offer was an attempt to erode the DPP’s support base. What of it? The DPP’s support base deserves to be eroded. The DPP’s support based needs to be eroded. As former DPP supporters now reluctantly concede, the DPP has made them nostalgic for the days when the KMT was only mildly corrupt, and at least knew how to grow the economy. Besides, the DPP is doing a far better job of eroding its own support base than either the CCP or the KMT. If anything, the CCP and KMT need to pay closer attention to the DPP’s blunders. Only then will they be able to erode the DPP’s support base even more effectively.
The Taipei Times denounces the KMT as a “traitorous opposition [that signed an agreement] with a country [sic] that has 800 missiles trained on it.” Rebutting such a charge is difficult for only one reason. One has to pick one’s jaw off the floor before one can speak.
In fact, who is a patriot and who is a traitor is not that hard to determine. Who is a patriot and who is a traitor is not a matter of subjective opinion. Who is a patriot and who is a traitor is a matter of demonstrable behavior. A patriot is one who swears allegiance to a nation and its constitution, then defends that nation and its constitution. A traitor is one who swears allegiance to a nation and its constitution, but then subverts that nation and its constitution.
Most KMT officials within the ROC government, with the notable exception of Lee Teng-hui and his ilk, are patriots. Before assuming office, KMT officials swore allegiance to the Republic of China and the Republic of China Constitution. Upon assuming office, they have faithfully defended the Republic of China and the Republic of China Constitution.
DPP and TSU officials within the ROC government, on the other hand, are traitors. Before assuming office, DPP and TSU officials swore allegiance to the Republic of China and the Republic of China Constitution. Upon assuming office, they have treacherously subverted the Republic of China and the Republic of China Constitution.
Who are the patriots, and who are the traitors is crystal clear. Is it really necessary to say anything more?
Taiwan Independence Media Spin Control: One thing Lien’s trip has achieved, however, is to drive yet another stake through the heart of Taiwan’s already faltering democratic system. Sharp divisions have long festered under the surface of Taiwanese society, but since Lien’s first visit to China last year, these divisions have resurfaced with a vengeance. By teaming up with the dictatorship across the Taiwan Strait to oppose Taiwanese who believe in democracy, Lien has done untold damage to this nation. It is hard to believe that this is a man who spent years both studying and teaching political science at some of the best universities in the self-styled “home of democracy,” when it is apparent to all that he has not one iota of respect for that political system.
Reality Check: The Taipei Times writes that Lien’s trip has driven “yet another stake through the heart of Taiwan’s already faltering democratic system.”
Lien Chan’s role I will leave for later. What I want to ask is: Why is Taiwan’s “democratic system,” so-called, faltering? Ironically, the editors of the Taipei Times provide the answer in their very next sentence. Because sharp divisions festering beneath the surface of Taiwan’s society have resurfaced with a vengeance.
Who is responsible for these sharp divisions resurfacing with a vengeance? Why Taiwan independence demagogues, of course. Who else? Taiwan independence demagogues are the ones who thrive on such divisions, the sharpest, the most primitive, the most atavistic of all divisions — ethnic divisions. They are the ones who have divided the Chinese people on Taiwan into “zheng gang de tai wan ren” (real Taiwanese) and “zhong guo zhu” (Chinese pigs) in order to promote their “Taiwanese, not Chinese ethnic and national consciousness.” Their “Taiwanese vs. Chinese” divisions mean power. Not “people power.” Not “power to the people.” But power to the Taiwan independence nomenklatura. If the editors of the Taipei Times want to see who the culprits are, they need only look in the mirror.
The Divided China problem is a lingering after effect of the Cold War era capitalist vs. Communist Chinese Civil War. This internal division was created by the CCP and KMT, and will be healed by the CCP and KMT. That is precisely what Lien Chan and Hu Jintao are doing at the moment. Taiwan independence Quislings, who are nothing but contemptible pawns in the service of US and Japanese neocolonialist and neo-imperialist aggression against the Chinese nation have nothing to say in this matter. They should count themselves fortunate they are not rounded up and summarily executed for treason.
As far as “stakes through the heart” are concerned, had the editors of the Taipei Times been better versed in western folk legends, they would have realized that one only drives stakes though the hearts of vampires. On second thought, perhaps the Taipei Times’ malapropism is unwittingly apropos. Professor Lien Chan is indeed a counterpart to Professor Abraham van Helsing, vampire killer. By meeting with Hu Jintao a second time, Lien has indeed driven a second stake through the ideological heart of the Taiwan independence movement, the Count Dracula vampire that is sucking the lifeblood from the Chinese people on Taiwan. And not a moment too soon.
Taiwan Independence Media Spin Control: Why doesn’t he just apply for membership in China’s KMT — the Revolutionary Committee of the Kuomintang, which split from the KMT in the 1940s — and take a seat in the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference? He would feel much more at home there, since the one-party authoritarian system still employed in China would remind him of the good old days under KMT rule in Taiwan, when he didn’t need to rely on the support of the people.
Reality Check: Lien Chan doesn’t need to apply for membership “China’s KMT.” Lien Chan is a member of “China’s KMT.” Somebody needs to slap some sense into these Taiwan independence Quislings. Lien Chan is the Honorary Chairman of “China’s KMT,” aka the Chinese Nationalist Party, aka the “Zhongguo Guomindang,” aka the Kuomintang or KMT. The address of the Chinese Nationalist Party is “No. 11, Zhongshan S. Road, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC 100.” The abbreviation ROC of course stands for the Republic of China. The Republic of China is the formal name of China. Just as the United States of America is the formal name of America. Got that? Taiwan is part of China. Taiwan is inside China. Lien Chan didn’t go to “China” to meet with Hu JIntao. Lien Chan went from one region of China to another region of China to meet with Hu Jintao.
Unless and until Taiwan independence Quislings succeed in overthrowing the Republic of China government in Taipei and replacing it with a government of the “Republic of Taiwan,” they will forever remain Chinese citizens living on Chinese soil. They of course know this better than anyone. That’s why try as they might to convince themselves that “The Republic of China equals Taiwan, and Taiwan equals the Republic of China,” they can’t bring themselves to live with the Republic of China Constitution, the Republic of China national title, the Republic of China national flag, and the Republic of China national anthem. They can’t stand the word “China.” The fact is Taiwan independence Quislings don’t care about “freedom and democracy,” don’t care about human rights and political liberty, don’t care about constitutionalism and the rule of law. Taiwan independence Quislings care only about their neurotic and irrational “Taiwanese, not Chinese” identity politics. See: Taiwan Independence and the Stockholm Syndrome. They care only about officially redefining themselves as “Taiwanese, not Chinese,” the sooner the better. That’s why they can’t resist exhorations to formally scrap the Republic of China Constitution in 2006 and to found a “Republic of Taiwan” in 2008.
As far as “one-party authoritarian systems” go, does anybody on Taiwan today not know that Chen regime ruled Taiwan is a one-party, correction, one-man authoritarian system? Does anybody on Taiwan today not know that Chen Shui-bian and the DPP both received humiliatingly low 18% approval ratings in a confidential poll commissioned by the DPP itself, but which was leaked to the press? Does anybody on Taiwan today not know that KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou’s ratings reached as high as 80% following the three in one County and Municipal Elections? Does anybody on Taiwan today not know which political leaders and which political parties enjoy “the support of the people?”
Taiwan Independence Media Spin Control: But having been rejected by the people of Taiwan not once, but twice, he decided to sell his soul to the devil, and turned to the only place where he knew he would be guaranteed a red-carpet reception. Indeed, looking at the pictures of the reception at the economic forum with hundreds of prominent businesspeople would impress anyone — except that many of those people had been threatened, coerced and press-ganged into coming.
Reality Check: Lien Chan was not “rejected by the people of Taiwan twice,” and Pan Green spin controllers know it. On election day 2000, Pan Blue supporters voted for James Soong because they feared the consequences of a split vote. On election day 2004, with Lien and Soong on the same ticket, they gave Lien Chan a 53% to 47% majority over Chen Shui-bian. In private, away from the TV news cameras, Pan Green officials, activists, and grass roots supporters freely admit that Lien Chan won the 2004 Presidential Election fair and square. But they insist that Chen Shui-bian’s phony 319 Wag the Dog “assassination attempt” and 320 election fraud were “justifed” because they feel a single four year term just wasn’t enough for their man and their camp to show their stuff.
Does Lien Chan need to cross the Taiwan Strait to be guaranteed a red carpet reception? Hardly. A scientific poll conducted by TVBS immediately following the second Lien/Hu summit reveals that Lien Chan, with an approval rating of 54%, is the second most popular political figure on the island, right behind first place Ma Ying-jeou with an approval rating of 70%. Despite the fact that Lien Chan is officially retired from politics and nominally out of the picture, he remains far more popular than DPP premier Su Tseng-chang in fourth place at 44%, than former DPP premier Frank Hsieh in fifth place at 40%, than former DPP premier Yu Hsi-kuen in sixth place at 30%, than “sitting vice-president” Annette Lu in seventh place at 29%, than former president Lee Teng-hui in eighth place at 23%, than 2000 presidential frontrunner James Soong in ninth place at 21%, and here’s the real kicker, than Chen Shui-bian, the “sitting president” in tenth place, dead last, at 13%.
I mean, who are the editors of the Taipei Times trying to kid? Do they think we are morons who don’t have the wits to access other news sources? Do they think they can make us believe anything they want? Please!
Taiwan Independence Media Spin Control: In his bid to satisfy his vanity, Lien and the KMT have merely become tools of the Chinese Communist Party’s “united front” campaign. Lien is like the Pied Piper of Hamelin, and the pro-unification media his pipe, as he leads Taiwan’s democracy into the dark reaches of Beijing’s cavern. The question is: Do the Taiwanese people want to follow him?
Reality Check: One truly has to wonder, do Deep Green media spin controllers actually believe their own hysterical rantings? When I ask that question, I’m not merely resorting to an old and reliable rhetorical device. I mean it. I really would like to know whether they believe their own outdated McCarthyite rhetoric.
Have Deep Green media spin controllers actually come to believe their own Taiwan independence Newspeak? Have they actually come to believe that “War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength?” Do they truly not understand that if anyone deserves to be prosecuted for high treason, it is DPP and TSU officials? Do they truly not understand that Lien Chan is a bona fide Chinese patriot, and that his Journey of Peace last year and his Economic and Trade Summit this year are the Chinese counterpart of Willy Brandt’s “Ostpolitik” and Kim Dae-jung’s “Sunshine Policy,” and that Lien Chan and Hu Jintao deserve consideration for the Nobel Peace Prize?
Taiwan independence media spin controllers had better wake up and smell the coffee. The Cold War is over. The global standoff between capitalism and Communism is a fading memory. The Berlin Wall has been demolished. Germany has been reunified. Korea and China are next in line. The intitials “CCP” for all intents and purposes, stand for the “Chinese Capitalist Party.” No one, not even Deep Green sponsors of the Taiwan independence movement such as the Ku and Tsai family syndicates, give a damn about Pan Green demagogues’ McCarthyite mutterings about “Pied Pipers” and “dark reaches.”
Whether “the Taiwanese people,” i.e., the Chinese people on Taiwan, want to follow Lien Chan is no longer a question. That question has already been answered. The undisguised, dutiful, even enthusiastic attendence of Taiwan’s business elite at the second Lien/Hu summit in Beijing demonstrated that “the Taiwanese people” have already decided to follow Lien Chan and the KMT toward a reunified China.