While we are on this subject, I just have to say that I am heartily amused by this whole scenario, in which the separatists have adopted the rhetoric of reunificationists. “Treason” “Sell out” “Go back to China” etc etc. Whats even more amusing are the letters to the editor that the Taipei Times is publishing, all terce denunciations that the KMT is betraying Taiwan, all interestingly enough written by American citizens living in the United States. Even though you foreign schismatics(I love this term) and running dog lackeys of foreign imperialists and Japanese rightists(another handy pejorative) aren’t actually citizens, at least you live on Taiwan.
I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s treason. I do think that technically it is possibly illegal … however, since the DPP has been able to do NOTHING whatsoever in terms of even talking with China, at least the KMT has … and from what was covered in their “ten point agreement,” it has nothing to do with the reunification issue, but rather on improving commerce, transportation, and further cross-strait links. Hopefully it will be a positive step. The DPP hasn’t been willing to make any serious moves or overtures to talk with the Chinese, so it’s time that someone did. Like I said before, if they’re talking, there won’t be war. There needs to be more talking and less chest-thumping (on both sides).
The comparison to the 1972 American presidential campaign in today’s TT illustrated to me how treason-filled these KMT “quislings” are. What if WW2 air-force bomber pilot and Democratic candidate George S. McGovern went to Paris and conducted negotiations with the Vietnamese on behalf of the Democratic Party. Americans of both political persuasions would have been unanimous in their condemnation. To me it just reiterates that some pan-blue people are not democratic-minded at all. At least the pan-greens, Japanese rightists such as the Governor of Tokyo, and the so called imperialists you mention value democracy, the rule of law, and elections.
The similarities between these two are evident: 
I know that you are not this naive. It has everything to do with unification.
[quote=“Chewycorns”]At least the pan-greens, Japanese rightests such as the Governor of Tokyo, and the so called imperialists you mention value democracy, the rule of law, and elections.
[/quote]
But do those greens have the balls and brains to come up with a response to what the KMT has done? I’m still waiting to see what the DPP’s next move will be. Any predictions? Folks, I think we have to hand it to the KMT that this was a rather shrewd move on their part. It just may bite them in the ass, but there is also a good chance that it won’t. There are no elections coming up. They have plenty of time to adjust their image as necessary before the next major elections. They have taken a gamble, but it is a very calculated one. I have my doubts over whether or not CSB will be able to come up with a strong response to these developments. I pledge that if he proves me wrong, I’ll send him a years supply of Brylcreem.
I’m sure it was calculated; given the anti-secessionist protest, the KMTs move was specifically designed to split the issue and negate the idea of a unified Taiwanese opposition.
Whether it was deliberately co-ordinated with the CCP is a matter of supposition; you can make your own decision.
To my mind, the only question is how much Lien Chan pockets for selling Taiwan- he must have finally realized he has no chance of being elected.
death knell, kicking screaming throes, utter complete hopelessness, suicide.
:bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo:
personally, i think it’s great. what, it’s not like we weren’t worried about threats from the mainland before.
I know that you are not this naive. It has everything to do with unification.[/quote]
No, it has little to do with reunification. On the other hand, I hope you are not this naive, either, what with Chen’s “inability” to come up with any initiative on this issue – you think that’s not about TI? (or rather, about winning the support of his base?)
Oh the silliness. Everybody is out for their electoral chances; very few are standing on principle. The DPP certainly is not; neither is the KMT. Better relations with the mainland, after all is the plank of KMT and a major major advantage that KMT has over the DPP, and on this issue, the voters consistently side with them, as they do on this visit.
I can’t believe this kind of ‘democratic’ and ‘rule of law’ bullshit is pulled by pan-greens. When are pan-greens going to abide by the ROC Constitution? When are the pan-greens going to listen to the democratic supermajority who want the status quo and stable and improving straits relations? Not fucking ever when their election strategy depends on them to outdo the TSU in whipping up their rabid base by pushing TI and demonizing the mainland.
The only authority the KMT has in its “negotiations” with the CCP is the relationship between China and the KMT. Period. It has no say over the relationship between China and Taiwan. If the KMT had stuck to the limits of the former, then this issue would not be of the same magnitude it is now. But even then the KMT would still have to deal with the prospect of having violated the ROC Constitution. KMT, however, chose to bypass the entire democratic system in Taiwan and negotiated with a rival government on another shore. Sounds like textbook definition of treason.
The idea that the opening of cross-strait dialogue is beneficial or that the KMT is aptly breaking the deadlock in dialogue somehow makes their little foray legal or justified is just plain besides the point. A democratic society cannot operate under the ends-justifies-the-means mentality. That’s why we have laws. Otherwise our judicial system would be operating under the guilty-until-proven-innocent philosophy, our legislature would be allowing disputes to occur then pass laws based on the outcome, and our executive would have free reign to do as he pleases regardless of legality, as long as he meant well or achieves a favorable outcome. In other words, the KMT is in the wrong under our current Constitutional system regardless of whatever intentions or results it may seek or produce.
It’s clear that this is a calculated political gambit by the KMT, as had been pointed out. Had the KMT only negotiated for its own party (ie., the only body it had legal authority over), it still would have been subject to legal scrutiny. But a defeated opposition party attempting to negotiate the future of the country that voted it out of power is simply a (probably intentional) slap in the face to the government in power. It is unacceptable, and tangential arguments of how pan-greens are not abiding by the Constitution, blah blah blah are simply that - tangential. And a load of rubbish. And I think the poster himself (AC zeugmite) knows it.
Yo! Did you read the last page and a half of this thread?
The KMT is doing nothing illegal by the ROC Constitution or any law (hint: read the Constitution+laws before spouting), and it is negotating on its own behalf and it is still up to the LY and the EY-MAC to make these points more than words. No procedure has been bypassed at all.
And in case you missed it, the pan-blue is still the ruling bloc in the Legislative Yuan, and they were elected to this position. So what if they lost the presidential vote? Pan-blue voters still have a voice through the LY. Learn to live with rules.
I know that you are not this naive. It has everything to do with unification.[/quote]
No, it has little to do with reunification. On the other hand, I hope you are not this naive, either, what with Chen’s “inability” to come up with any initiative on this issue – you think that’s not about Taiwan independence? (or rather, about winning the support of his base?)
[/quote]
Where have I stated otherwise? You seem to be searching for a strawman. Whether the KMT intends it to be so or not, for the CCP, this meeting and every other interaction with ROC politicians is about unification. Take away the possibility of unification and the CCP would refuse to deal with them at all except for with a gun.
[quote=“zeugmite”]
And in case you missed it, the pan-blue is still the ruling bloc in the Legislative Yuan, and they were elected to this position. So what if they lost the presidential vote? Pan-blue voters still have a voice through the LY. Learn to live with rules.[/quote]
Um…just to remind you of the concept of separation of powers … Legislative branches exist to make laws. They don’t exist to make “agreements” with other parties on behalf of the whole country. If you look at almost any democratic country with a true division of powers, the diplomatic duties fall to the executive. So yes, the KMT is way out of line…whether it is legal or illegal. Regardless, their move is in poor taste. If they were in control of the executive branch, things would be different.
Unfortunately, the separation/balance of power in the ROC Constitution is not layed out as clearly as in the US Constitution, nor is it clear whether the government is a parliamentary system or presidential system. This is why the constitution needs to be revised. Seems like even CSB has dropped this plan, though …
So the KMT is talking to the CCP. And this is a bad thing? Would it be okay if the DPP talked to the CCP? (Remember the DPP, not the government)
I don’t understand. If the KMT do it, it’s bad, because they’re the baddies. Isn’t this just politics? Where’s the legal element? Where is the law that says the KMT can’t talk to the CCP, and where is the evidence of the content of their discussions? Is this an official KMT delegation?
Anyway, here’s what’s going to happen: Nothing. Ever. The end. Well, apart from the collapse of the Taiwanese economy after the CCP kick all the Taiwanese factory owners out because they can get their technology transfers first hand now, and all the rich Taiwanese leave Taiwan for California as they always have done.
Be nice if the government had a go at running the country some day. Maybe if they did that people might be happier and not just want to make a quick buck in China and bugger off. If the DPP shut up about China for just one minute and did the fucking job it was elected to do it would suit everyone much better.
Can we fix the hospitals, roads, education system, pensions, tax system please? When you’ve got a minute. Cheers. That’d be great.
Okay, let’s see what the KMT and CCP talked about. Here’s part of the agreement they supposedly reached. (Strangely, Beijing’s version of the agreement has 12 points while the KMT’s version has 10 points. Looks like someone was dozing away at the meeting.)
This is from Beijing’s version of the agreement. The KMT version also reflects these points more or less, but in different wording.
I’ve picked 2 of the 12 points for their interesting wording. The English is a rough translation of parts marked in parentheses (((-)))).
On charter flights:
──盡快推動實現兩岸客運包機節日化﹑常態化﹐增加航點﹐擴大搭載對象﹐以滿足廣大臺商﹑臺生和兩岸航空公司的要求。((((((中共中央臺辦歡迎國民黨繼續前來協商﹐並積極促成臺灣有關部門同意派出民間行業組織﹐前來協商﹐獲得具體成果。)))))
The CCP
[quote=“hexuan”]
Be nice if the government had a go at running the country some day. Maybe if they did that people might be happier and not just want to make a quick buck in China and bugger off. If the DPP shut up about China for just one minute and did the f***ing job it was elected to do it would suit everyone much better.
Can we fix the hospitals, roads, education system, pensions, tax system please? When you’ve got a minute. Cheers. That’d be great.[/quote]
If the KMT/PFP would stop obstructing the passage of every f***king bill that might be possible.
[quote=“Levitator”] The KMT is welcomed to come here to negotiate and push the relevant Taiwan departments to agree to send private (or non-government) farmers organizations to the mainland and negotiate with relevant private organizations on the mainland
Pfff. From greens’ persepective, you can always see it ideologically, but the truth is, legislators and private business groups and consortia of countries do often send representatives or delegations to negotiate business deals and economic packages around the world. Government approval is sought as a final step and is only necessary if laws require such approval. If you believe it’s illegal, you better have a damned good reason. Or you can bring a suit yourself.
Once ideology is removed, the questions should be asked pragmatically about these agreements themselves and whether they benefit Taiwanese or not. The KMT is under no obligation to do everything the CCP asks; and if it is to have the support of the voters, it is obviously only going to push for those things that make sense to Taiwan. It is naked TIer ideology to say the KMT is the CCP’s field office. People who say these things either (1) don’t trust the voters to decide on KMT’s efforts come election time or (2) don’t care about what the voters want and only want to push their ideology. Now that is something for a group that trumpets democracy so fucking loudly.
Admit it. The voters are with the KMT on the issues of the economy and diplomacy. DPP can keep pampering its base and complain or suck it up and do what it has the power to do. Don’t give me the blah-blah that the LY obstructs (or even has power to obstruct) the government in relation with the mainland – it plainly DOES NOT.
Yes it would be bad if the DPP talked directly with the CCP because the CCP is indistinguishable from the Chinese state and the DPP does not represent Taiwan. Likewise with the KMT. It is extremely inappropriate for the KMT to do this and (deliberately) undercuts the authority of the government. In the context of a country warning of invasion it is tantamount to treason
The KMT is not claiming to represent Taiwan in this trip. It’s representing itself as a party in the LY. It might help you to read the annoucements. Where does it say they are making final decisions on behalf of Taiwan on this trip?
No, why don’t you look them up and tell us which one the KMT is violating. I mean, to make such a statement must mean you have checked out the source, right?
This is off topic, but I would like statistics on this. I urge you to start a new thread with such statistics. Then the “merits” can be discussed.