They do. But the government also has the right to deny entry visas.
Can you explain how granting Rebiya Kadeer a visa would advance the interests of the people of Taiwan?
Why do you think South Korea detained and then refused entry to Dolkun Isa?
What rubbish. 43% did not vote for the current government. Are they supposed to be silent? Really, please explain how the opposition in a democratic country is supposed to be supine after an election defeat? Please also explain how ordinary citizens should be forbidden in a free society from inviting other citizens of others countries that do not threaten their own.
Remember, Kadeer is not threat to Taiwan (and she is not likely one to China either).
Yes, the KMT were elected. But I don’t recal them ever saying that mending ties with China meant that we would be unable to watch movies or invite people to taiwan that Beijing objects to. The application of their policies of closer ties have to be watched carefully to make sure they are truly in the interests of Taiwan. If people believe they are not, they have every right to challenge those policies.
That’s how a democracy works.
Well it was basically-you might call it supine, other people would call it diplomatic. Why is it in the interests of either South Korea or Taiwan to antagonize the Chinese?
They are both intelligent enough to realize that allowing Uighur independence leaders may lead to a public reaction in China, which could then force the leaders hands into taking action that would damage relations. This would be in no ones interests.
You seem to have a very naive view of international relations. The “defiant and plucky” little guy (er… which the West used to support :roflmao: ) stands up to the big “bad” guy…
No, they’re not supposed to be silent, they’re supposed to engage in democratic activism – rallies, speeches, all the usual stuff. What they’re not supposed to do is try to directly sabotage the government.
Is everything to be explained by its utlity in advancing the nation? How does allowing my parents to visit next year advance the interests of Taiwan?
If you need an explanation see my points earlier. Taiwan’s advantages lie in its freedom. If the closer we get to China the more marginal those freedoms become and we lose out in a thousand ways.
It’s not to Taiwan’s advantage to create a situation where people here begin to feel their freedoms are being curtailed. That will give rise to more protests and social instability such as rife in China. Is that what we want? Is that what you want?
Of course no doubt you will then turn and say the opposition is causing instability which will justify taking even more freedoms away.
Sabotage? By inviting someone who has been granted asylum by the US? What planet do you live on where such a thing is sabotage?
The one in which things are not that simple, and people take advantage of that.
I am not disputing that this is what the governments of Korea and Taiwan considered. The point is was it right, was it just and is it in fact in the country’s long term interests? You make no argument that it is, simply saying it is good diplomacy.
And you can laugh at my defense of freedom all you want. It doesn’t sting in the slightest.
Again, how is inviting Kadeer to Taiwan sabatoging the government. It’s obvious you just tossed this word out without thinking about it in the slightest.
Well I guess you can make the point either way…national interest is a highly nebulous term.
My own opinion is that having bad relations with China is not in Taiwan’s national interest. I don’t know what positive results inviting Uighur independence leaders could have-the only certainty is that it would worsen relations with China, particularly if it caused a strong nationalist reaction within China.
If I am right, then it is sabotage because it was done deliberately to damage the government’s progress with China. Which is what I’ve been trying to explain in every post in this thread.
If I’m wrong, then GUTS United Taiwan and the DPP legislators who have jumped in aren’t thinking at all about political implications, and just want to help educate people on the plight of the Uyghurs.
Are you saying you believe the latter? Or that you actually can’t figure out what I’m driving at?
Of course this is political. I am saying that in a free country it is the legitimate right of citizens and opposition parties to challenge the course of the party in power, especially when they think that power is engaging in harmful policies. I consider letting Beijing decide what movies we watch and what people we invite in to be unacceptable foreign policy. I guess you don’t.
It is not disrupting progress with China unless you believe that progress is determiend by how much control Beijing has over internal matters in Taiwan.
This should be an internal matter. Furthermore, the KMT should be considering what is best for Taiwan. Caving in to Beijing is sure to lead to instability here. So which should be the priority? Ensuring a free stable environment within Taiwan, or cozying up to Beijing? The former obviously as this government ultimately has a responsibility to the Taiwanese.
Define good relations with China and how Taiwan can achieve this without giving up its autonomy and freedoms?
As I mention above, if the KMT continue down this path it will cause instability in Taiwan. As the Ma government is ultimately responsible for Taiwan and not China, it has to consider that its policies may in fact make conditions here worse. And it is not for the opposition and ordinary citizens to accept the loss of their freedoms simply to make foreign policy go smoother. That’s what you and Brendon seem to be arguing. “Hey all you freedom lovers, we hope you can take a hit for the sake of the KMT’s goal of unifying with China.”
The problem with the Kadeer issue is that it places the needs of China above those of Taiwan.
Blah blah blah.
The KMT was elected into government, which means they were given the legal authority to define “the best interests of Taiwan”. Mucha Man received approximately zero votes in the last election, and his opinion on Kadeer is of corresponding value.
Did the KMT bow down to Beijing on this issue? Of course it did. For no other reason than not antagonizing the Communist Party, it decided to deny this visa application. “Disgusting?” Depends on the side of the aisle that you sit on, of course.
Shocking? Only to the intellectually dishonest. How many visa applications (or whatever diplomatic equivalent) were rejected as Chen Shui-bian flew around the globe, looking for friendly airports where he could just land and refuel?
As far as Kadeer goes, she’s clearly not a terrorist in the Osama Bin-Ladin mold. She’s more or less a figure-head, the “spiritual” leader of the political movement. It’s like debating whether the heads of Sein Fein were terrorists. I’m pretty sure Ulster loyalists had a pretty one-sided view on that question.
Fundamentally, showing her movie doesn’t really “matter”… it doesn’t change anything on the ground. But it is indeed a litmus test of who, as was said earlier by a different poster, is more prone to say “fuck you” to China. The KMT decided that’s not the kind of relationship it wanted with mainland China. On the other hand, Australia did indeed say “fuck you”… and has been saying quite a bit of “fuck you” on various economic circles as well. That’s life… as long as China has an uncompromising and unpopular agenda, that will happen, and China can’t expect warm fuzzies and pats on the back from everyone. The question is, will there be a time when China gets to say “fuck you” in return?
Ah, the trolls appear. A little late but then that’s how little tyrants behave. 
So was South Korea also giving up its autonomy and freedoms by detaining and then denying entry to Dolkun Isa?
Of course the Taiwan has to consider the Chinese reaction when making decisions of this nature, but then so does the ROK, the US or any other country you can think of. This is not the same as saying that Beijing “controls” your internal matters. Often a balance has to be found, the Dalai Lama was allowed in, Rabiya Kadeer was not.
There is no loss of civil or political freedom here. They are simply denying a foreigner a visa, as it is their prerogative to do so, and as other democratic countries (including the US) frequently do.
No I am not arguing that-please do construct straw men on the basis of what “I seem to be arguing.”
If the KMT really wanted to be absorbed by the CCP, it would have done it years ago.
But you still haven’t explained how it is in Taiwan’s interests to allow Kadeer to visit.
As a matter of course, by immigration law, people are allowed to freely travel in and out of the country. There must be a sound reason to prevent someone and not upsetting Beijing is really not an acceptable reason. Excuses are made but you really have to be gullible to believe them.
And what South Korea did to an entirely different person is not really relevant here, is it? Nor what the US or other countries do to other people. We have an incident in Taiwan which is indefensible except if you agree being supine to Beijing is sound foreign policy.
As for the Dalai Lama was let in because of the huge embarassment over Morakot. If you recal, Ma expressly said he would not be allowed in last fall. Had there not been such an internally critical event that could topple the Ma admin in the next election there would have been no invitation. You know that. There was no give and take. Ma’s hand was forced over the DL issue. Few people know or care about Kadeer and so they risk comparatively less.
But the Ma government’s first concern is supposed to be with Taiwan. It was not in Taiwan’s interests as a country dedicated to promoting its freedom and democracy on the world stage (for a host of reasons) to deny Kadeer a visa.
Oh, and how about defining good relations with Beijing?
Getting fucked without the decency of a reach around.
For a guy who claims to read a lot of history…
Under Lee, under Chen, under Chiang?
The current path of the KMT began with the Lien-Soong visits in 2005, as a direct result of losing the election, and also in response to changes in China.
Yes, something like that.