Naive Advocation By Academic

http://iservice.libertytimes.com.tw/liveNews/news.php?no=334793&type=%E5%9C%8B%E9%9A%9B

I agree with what they said in most part, however, their naivety still astonishes me.

談及美中台關係,黃奎博指出,對馬政府來說,美中台三邊關係,或是美台、美中、兩岸關係,不再是零和遊戲,而是「三贏局面」(win-win-win), 即使有些齟齬,也希望只是短期現象。現今的台灣政府自詡為和平製造者(peace maker),協助美中台關係朝正面、健康方向發展。

I think this is very naive because the win-win-win concept is nearly impossible.  Furthermore, “Peace Maker” is too huge a burden for Taiwan to carry.  China has the most initiative on whether to have peace or not.  All it has to do is give up annexing Taiwan, and there will be peace.  Furthermore, what Ma government is actually doing is paving the road for China to annex Taiwan.  Peace Maker, perhaps, but in the expenses of Taiwan.  It will be a loss-loss-win situation if Ma keeps going in this direction.

鄧中堅指出,中國從過去與西方對抗,到鎖國封閉,現在則開放門戶與西方往來,從這樣的歷史發展軌跡來看,或許有一天,中國也將出現讓人驚訝的轉變。

Now this one just sounds out right stupid.  First of all China already changed, from a communist dictator to a capitalist/socialist dictator.  Secondly, Soviet Union and the East European blocs suffered a complete economic failure and that is why they changed.  China is enjoying an economic success.  How can it change any time soon?  The comparison is so out-of-place.  Furthermore, China has not stopped opposing the west politically even though it trades with the west.

These people I just feel like they are too naive, even if their intentions are good.  (or maybe their intention are just bad, trying to put some makeup on Ma recent pro-China policy)

Advertisements

2 comments so far

  1. A Bin on

    I don’t get it why can Taiwan not be a contributor, or peacemaker in Huang’s term, that can greatly facilitate the positive development of contemporary US-Sino relations. Taiwan’s self-restraint and cautious policy toward China is in fact helping the US get rid of one of the most troublesome part of US-Sino relations. Also, no idea why what the Ma Administration is doing will pave the way for Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Ma wants to purchase advanced weapons, and he wants to preserve the ROC’s sovereignty by sticking to the “1992 consensus” (i.e., “One China, respective interpretations). What’s wrong with him? I don’t see the arguments made by these people as naivety but a more ideal plan that may work in the long run.

    • dixteel on

      The first part of what you said is exactly the problem. Taiwan is sacrificing its own benefits in order for “China and the US not having trouble.” However, that is exactly what China wants the US and Taiwan to think. By placing all the burden of the issue on Taiwan, Taiwan is the only one that has to carry the load. While China freely expand its military etc and further marginalize Taiwan internationally, Taiwan has to further burden itself with “peace keeping” by restraining its own actions and assume a surrendering posture. People forget that China is the one that causes the tension in the first place. If they give up the use of military threat against Taiwan, or if they give up trying to annex Taiwan entirely, then of course there will be peace, because obviously Taiwan has no desire to attack China in any way or form.

      What Ma is doing is paving the way for surrendering Taiwan to China, not for invasion. There won’t be any invasion if China annex Taiwan peacefully. And that is what Ma intend to do, at least when we observe his actions. And that is the current trajectory, if Ma and KMT are able to continue the current policy and nothing changes in the near future.

      If you really knows the detail, you will realize that 1992 consensus is a complete fabrication, made by Su Chi, who just stepped down. Do Ma and his KMT really want adv weapons from the US? Then why did they blocked the military purchasing bills before 2008, during DPP’s administration? They blocked it more than 100 times. If they bought it back then the prices were even cheaper, plus they could have gotten F-16 C/D much earlier.

      I stand firm on the belief that those arguements are naive or make-ups and excuses for Ma’s actions. They have to explain or advacate the “what Ma is doing” is good for all sides rationale to the US circle, in order for Ma to continue his path of surrender. Not everything is as rosy as those people described.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: