Comments on: Sunflower Student Movement

By: Kerim

Kerim — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 02:45:22 +0000

@T.Chiu The government's response has been the usual pro-trade neoliberal pabulum. The actual numbers put out from the government as to the amount of jobs that will come to Taiwan as a result seem to be overly optimistic. I've rounded up some more links to recent articles on the protests here [scroll down to the bottom to see my links].

By: T.Chiu

T.Chiu — Sat, 29 Mar 2014 00:06:43 +0000

Thank you for this enlightening article! I was wondering if you know how the government is explaining it’s push for the trade agreement. How is it supposed to benefit Taiwan? And what preparations are being made for it?

By: Eisel Mazard

Eisel Mazard — Fri, 28 Mar 2014 16:50:33 +0000

Although I wasn’t surprised that the newspaper published my letter, I’m surprised to find it quoted here.

By: C.L.

C.L. — Wed, 26 Mar 2014 22:13:02 +0000

There is another video (with English sub) showimg how Taiwan people have been through since 1945 KMT took over Taiwan. We have came to a generation with brave hearts and strong wills to free Taiwan from all these history burdens.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eIo9fCAUPAM

By: C.L.

C.L. — Wed, 26 Mar 2014 19:55:39 +0000

If you understand Chinese you should watch the video, it gives you a clear pictures on how students think and the inside of trade pact. Their movement is NOTHING to do with DPP as many think. They want the democracy in Taiwan. God bless Taiwan!!
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IJQwYxm39tI&sns=fb

By: Taiwanese

Taiwanese — Tue, 25 Mar 2014 18:14:10 +0000

Sadly, I don’t agree with the students’ action even though I understand where they are coming from. It is undeniably that China is and will be the economic powerful for a long time. Isolating Taiwan from the rest of the world and China will not help the economic progress. All lacking here is to follow the proper civil/constitutional procedure to pass the agreement. I pray DPP can set aside the apparent personal vendetta against the existing government. Let freedom and wisdom ring.

By: chocowei

chocowei — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 07:37:50 +0000

Dear Dr. Friedman,

Thanks for your thorough introduction on the current protest. I would very much appreciate it if you can help us promote #Taiwanoccupy and #Taiwan as the other two common hashtags because these two have been the most popular key words for the past few days. I think making the two words trend can help so much more to get international attention. Thank you!

By: mancaesar

mancaesar — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 04:22:09 +0000

@ Tony Chu:
After the Chinese civil war, the KTM government led by Chiang Kai Shek fled to Taiwan and set up set up shop in Taipei. As there was no peace treaty signed to end the war, they continued to steak claim to the whole of China. This attitude persisted through the 38 years of martial law in Taiwan that ended in 1987. When Chiang Kai Shek died, his son became the leader of the KMT government. By this time it had become clear that the communists weren’t going anywhere and that it was pointless for the KMT to claim control of the mainland. Chiang Kai Shek’s son began to institute political reforms, including allowing multiple political parties to legally exist and holding the country’s first elections. Since then, Taiwan has not viewed the communists as a rival Chinese political institution, but rather as a legitimate separate entity altogether. However, China does not reflect this. The Chinese government holds fast to the One China principle and views Taiwan as an integral part of China’s sovereign territory. Both the KMT and DPP parties view Taiwan as a separate country and wish to lead Taiwan into a more prominent role internationally. However, different methodologies in achieving this goal is what separates the parties. The KMT was the ruling party of all of China only 65 years ago. They still feel a much closer tie to the mainland. Many KMT party members still have family and friends in China. They have business connections there. They attach more importance to being ethnically Chinese. They see China’s rapid economic growth and would rather hitch their wagon to a nation of “brothers and sisters” than to the west. They view integrating with China as a “re-integration” because the KMT was actually a Chinese party originally. The DPP, however, has its power base in southern Taiwan rather than Taipei, where the nationalists settled in 1949. They do not feel a close bond with China. To them, integration with China would not be “re-integration”, but rather handing over their sovereignty to a foreign nation. They view China as a bully with hostile intentions towards Taiwan. They fear giving China any influence because they think China will take advantage of it to exert control over Taiwanese affairs from Beijing. As the majority of Taiwanese citizens have been Taiwanese for many generations, they share this distrust of the mainland. This explains the protests. Why then did the majority elect and then re-elect Ma Ying Jeou and the KMT instead of the DPP, which probably closer reflects the ideologies of the majority? Pragmatism. The DPP was in power before Ma Ying Jeou, but it made a big hot mess of Taiwan’s economy and pushed Taiwan and China to the brink of conflict with its antagonistic rhetoric. People felt the financial crunch and didn’t like it. They obviously felt that the KMT would be better for the economy and therefore the lesser evil. The KMT ran on a platform of stimulating the economy while maintaining a political status quo with China. However people have lost a lot of faith in President Ma’s ability to follow through on his campaign promises. And rightly so. The economy has stagnated and his only solution to that problem seems to be to turn to China for help.

I hope this sheds a little more light on the situation here in Taiwan.

By: Gokan Agan

Gokan Agan — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 12:29:14 +0000

UPDATE: Sorry, now there are four demands.

By: Wang

Wang — Sun, 23 Mar 2014 04:47:31 +0000

Correction: the students demand the agreement completely withdrawn

By: Tony Chu

Tony Chu — Sat, 22 Mar 2014 07:59:14 +0000

The content and the perspectives related to the discussion of the issue are rich. Many sources of information are gathered at one place to show a great overview. It is an excellent article written in such a short period of time as the development of the political crisis is still unfolding.

What lacks to me is the historical context. Imagine that I am a general English reader who only has the basic knowledge of Chinese civil war which happened right after the WWII. The common understanding of the history is that the PRC/the Communist China and the ROC/the Nationalist China in Taiwan are rivals. It would be difficult for me to understand the current condition why the politicians in Taiwan, especially those of the party that fought over the war with the communists, do not intend to safeguard the interest of their own country.

In other words, lacking a substantial peace treaty between the countries, why the politicians of ROC are eager to pursue the economic collaboration with the rival in bypassing the concern of national security/sovereignty is puzzling and therefore needs explanation.