Comments on “Taiwan and the Fight for Democracy-A Good Force in the Changing International Order”, paper by Tsai Ing-Wen, published in Foreign Affairs November/December 2021 issue. This is a 'call for help' paper seeking sympathizers. However, the paper contains many contradictory points and false statements. The author feels sad after reading it and urges politicians and political parties to think hard on the question: Who really cares about Taiwan?
The publication time of this article, the United News report: "Written at the invitation of Foreign Affairs" and its English and Chinese title, all suggested that this episode was too much like an orchestrated drama co-starred by the United States and Taiwan. The wording used in this article seems to be entirely based on the current script of the United States strategy of forming a world alliance of democracy against non-democracy (US-defined): Indo-Pacific future, Taiwan model (pawn), changing rules, and struggle between good and evil. Tsai Ing-wen is very proud that Taiwan is considered by the United States as a model of democracy. It doesn't matter where the content of the article comes from or who has modified or edited it; she is willing to sign and publish this article. What is important is that when the mainland celebrates the National Day on October 1st and commemorates the 110th anniversary of Sun Yat-Sen’s successful Xin-Hai Revolution of 1911 on October 9th, the United States and Taiwan must also appear in the media. Thus, the article scheduled to be published on the November/December bimonthly FA periodical quickly appeared on October 5th on the network. However, Xi Jinping’s speech on the 110th anniversary of the Xin Hai Revolution had clearly attracted more attention from Chinese and Westerners worldwide. Xi mentioned the Taiwan issue. The language was short but powerful. The Taiwan issue must be resolved along with national rejuvenation. Cross-strait reunification is the common will of all Chinese people. And he declares that one country - two systems is the basic framework for the common development of the motherland, emphasizing peaceful development, complete reunification, opposing secession, and claiming that Taiwan’s independence movement is a serious crime. Those who engages in splitting the country will not end well and they will be spurned and judged by the country and its people.
The author received Tsai Ing-Wen’s manuscript after October 10th. After reading it, he felt sad and not excited as he was after hearing Xi’s speech. Tsai’s article read like a long-winded call for help. On the one hand, it is saying that Taiwan is the model of democracy: on the other hand, it is saying that in the world the democratic system is falling to an disadvantageous position comparing to an authoritarian system. The article says Taiwan is being suppressed by the international community and is looking for unusual channels to connect with the world, but the article also says that Taiwan is a powerhouse that can maintain the world supply chain and help develop the regional economy. Any person who cares about international affairs and has the ability to judge and analyze really cannot offer any positive comment on Tsai’s article other than saying that the purpose of her article is to call for help. But due to the contradictory and false statements in its content, people cannot respond to its call for help with sympathy. Some people on the Internet say that Tsai is like a desperate dog jumping over a wall (狗急跳牆）, compelled to write the desperate article. This author would like to suggest another analogy. It is like a domestic cat who lands on the top edge of a high wall and doesn't know how to get off. If it jumps down, it will be seriously injured. This circular high wall has no end. This cat has everything to eat and drink in a castle, living comfortably, but it foolishly jumps out of the window. Fortunately, it lands on the edge of the high wall escaping a death fall. Is it useful to call for help now? I'm afraid it must wait for the owner to rescue it! The author uses this metaphor to describe the author's feeling, and this feeling comes with a reason. Please continue to read the following.
Taiwan is a part of China and China is the master. Most of the people of Taiwan are connected by blood from the descendants of Yan Huang (炎黃子孫）. Taiwan’s exports to the mainland account for 40% of its total exports. Mainland, with more people, makes greater progress as expected. Even in the semiconductor area, Taiwan is no match. Otherwise, would the mainland be able to go to the Moon and Mars? TSMC is just an OEM company which requires a lot of capital. Does the mainland have no money? The U.S. still owes her trillions of dollars! The US democratic system has progressed over 250 years still engaging in endless bipartisan fights deterring nation building. Taiwan has only been engaged in 30 years of democracy with more vicious party fights. Can Taiwan be considered as a model of democracy? The third world countries do not believe that nor will the developed European democracies. Lithuania may want to pretend to be a fairy tale country to take Taiwan to a joy ride back to eighteenth century, but Taiwan must be realistic. This is Tsai Ing-Wen’s first contradictory point. Being unyielding under pressure but taking no adventurous step even with help is another contradictory point. In Tsai’s content, she states that authoritarian governments function more efficiently in dealing with the pandemic, which promotes a contrast of ideologies. The article also implies that Taiwan is able to control the epidemic disease properly and help other regions, but she does not provide any specific data to prove it. Tsai directly compares the threat of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) proportional to the value of Taiwan. She also believes that Taiwan can contribute to maintaining the stability of the region. This is so contradictory to the purpose of this article, calling for help. On the one hand, Tsai is praising Taiwan's value by citing technology (artificial intelligence, biochemical technology, and semiconductor industries) to emphasize its strength. On the other hand, it admits an asymmetric situation, including military strength, obscured international relations (relying on special diplomatic channels), and need to invest in a mysterious asymmetric defense capability. This is also a contradictory point. Should Taiwan fail, would the whole region really be finished as she implied? Let’s ask who really cares most about Taiwan? The answer should be mainland China!
In addition to Many contradictions, Tsai has also made many false or untrue statements. Tsai believes that his government represents the entire people of Taiwan and that the people trust the elected officials, a great relationship. However, we know that Taiwan’s impeachment activities are more flaring than that in the U.S. Presidential candidate, Han Guo Yu, supported by millions of people, can be easily removed by a manipulated impeachment by the DPP. Now the KMT will also use the same tactics to depose or recall DPP officials, Taiwan was able to experiment with a democratic system because the CCP adhered to its belief in peaceful reunification and proposed a one country - two systems policy, which has given Taiwan decades of peace. However, Taiwan’s political parties (and politicians) only strive for political power by fooling voters, engaging in ethnic divisions, and completely disregarding the long-term safety and prosperity of the people. Doesn’t anti-China mean abandoning peace? Isn’t it true that there can be no democracy if no peace? Tsai not only failed to report the truth, but instead clung to the thighs of the U.S. defaming Mainland China with no conscience. She also used the strategy of the Democratic Alliance to oppose Mainland China. Comparing Tsai’s paper with the US White Paper on China, you can see the similarities in the text, and especially the tone, so much like the American version (Example, "We have to invest considerable resources to deepen our understanding of the Beijing regime". Isn’t this what the Americans often say?). What’s more ridiculous is that Tsai learned from the American National Endowment for Democracy (NED funding regime change worldwide) to set up a Taiwan Democracy Foundation funding organizations advocating democracy and human rights. The article also said that Taiwan would fight negative information because Taiwan had considerable experience in this regard. Judging from Taiwan’s cyber army (網軍performing fake news and personal attack) and organized fraud gangs (詐騙集團committing global crimes), Taiwan is indeed very experienced. Isn't Tsai's admission like a Kingsley gaffe?!
Tsai’s call for help is to find sympathizers (and the U.S. is looking for anti-China allies) and beg for cooperation, exchanges, and trades. Taiwan uses the trade money it earns from the Mainland (hundreds of billions of surplus) to buy US used weapons and supply resources for other small countries to take an anti-China stand. Should this work, ethically? Can it go far with no repercussion? Whether the U.S. can organize an anti-China Democratic League is yet unknown, and who will make a profit in the end in the competition between the U.S. and China is uncertain. What is certain, however, is that in this competition game between the U.S. and China, other relevant countries are all pawns, including Japan, South Korea, Australia, etc. etc., Taiwan is just a little pawn, not something that an article can change its status. For the sake of the future of the people in Taiwan, Taiwan’s political parties and politicians should learn from this call for help, not to be a cat who jumps onto the edge of a tall wall or a child who runs away from home in defiance of the parents. Think about where your home is, who really cares about you and hurry up and find your way home!