Secessionist Hypocrisy in Xinjiang and Taiwan

Secessionist Hypocrisy in Xinjiang and Taiwan
China Post Editorial
by Bevin Chu
July 12, 2009

The Taiwan independence movement is guilty of hypocrisy on a broad range of issues. For example, it sanctimoniously demands "clean government" even as it obstinately shields the appallingly corrupt pro-independence Chen Shui-bian from prosecution for corruption.

Now that secessionism in Xinjiang is making global headlines, Taiwan independence hypocrisy has extended to this hot-button issue as well.

Last Saturday former Premier Su Tseng-chang (DPP) got on his high horse and published an editorial entitled, "The need to be loud and clear about Xinjiang."

Su wrote: "The [mainland] Chinese government ordered the use of tanks and machine guns in a bloody suppression of members of the Uyghur ethnic group who were requesting [sic] equal treatment. [An] Uproar has resulted within the international community, rebuking [mainland] China for ignoring basic human rights and using violent, bloody methods to suppress the protests. Amid the global outcry, President Ma Ying-jeou has been silent ... and has acted as if the whole thing never happened. Ma is yet to say a single thing on the matter."

But Ma Ying-jeou is hardly alone.

Five years ago, on June 15, 2004, the ruling Democratic Progressive Party government on Taiwan, headed by Chen Shui-bian, ordered the violent suppression of the island's true owners, Taiwan's Aborigines.

Upon learning that hundreds of Taiwanese Aborigines had formed their own secessionist "Kaosha Republic," Chen Shui-bian ordered a crackdown. He sent in 500 heavily armed riot police to drive them from a six hectare site in Kaohsiung County the Aborigines had proclaimed as the seat of their republic. Four bulldozers leveled nearly 300 Aborigine homes.

The Aborigines said they were tricked by Chen's campaign aids, who promised to recognize their republic and grant each of them plots of land if they supported his re-election.

Tang Chao-cheng, Speaker of the Taiwan People Parliament, said Chen Shui-bian promised to establish "state within a state" relations with them if they voted for him. But once Chen got his second term, Tang said, he no longer cared whether they lived or died. The Aborigines attempted to block the bulldozers, but were forcibly removed by armed riot police.

"Give me back my home. We have no place to go," cried an elderly Aborigine woman. "What is the government for? It has not taken care of the Aboriginal people, has it?"

The Kaosha Republic had its own national flag, its own national anthem, and its own temporary government and parliament.

Agence France-Presse reported the incident in an article entitled "Police Dismantle Aboriginal 'Republic'."

Singapore's Straits Times reported the incident in an article entitled "Chen Crushes 'Republic' of Aborigines," and noted that "President Chen Shui-bian, widely believed to want independence for Taiwan, has ironically denied the same to a group who are the original Taiwanese - the Aborigines."

Five years ago, the ruling DPP regime on Taiwan ordered the use of bulldozers and armed riot police in a brutal suppression of members of an Aboriginal minority who were merely requesting that the newly reinstalled DPP government fulfill its election promises. The international media rebuked the DPP government for ignoring basic human rights and for using violent, brutal methods to suppress the protests.

Five years ago, Su Tseng-chang was silent. Five years ago, Su Tseng-chang acted as if the whole thing never happened. Five years later, Su has yet to say a single thing on the matter.

Instead, Su sanctimoniously proclaimed that "We should support the Uyghurs and their humble hopes for equal treatment, and demand that the [mainland] Chinese government cease its racist treatment of ethnic minorities."

Taiwan's Aborigines are a 2% ethnic minority. They are the victims of four centuries of racist treatment by the 74% Hoklo majority. One can only imagine how they, the true "Native Taiwanese," must feel as they are forced to listen to Su Tseng-chang's arrant hypocrisy.

The "right to secession" is a double-edged sword. If Su Tseng-chang and the Taiwan independence movement wish to invoke it to justify Hoklo secession from China, they had better be prepared to acquiesce to Taiwanese Aborigine demands for secession from any Hoklo dominated "Nation of Taiwan."

If Rebiya Kadeer and the East Turkestan Islamic Movement wish to invoke it to justify Uyghur secession from China, they had better be prepared to acquiesce to Pamiri, Sarikoli, Wakhi, Hui, Han, Mongol, Russian, Xibe, and Manchu demands for secession from any would be Uyghur dominated "East Turkestan," not to mention the Kurdish people's demands for secession from the Republic of Turkey.

A principled defense of the right to secession would authorize ever smaller political entities to secede from whatever political entity they currently belong to, stopping only at the level of the individual citizen. Not surprisingly, no government on earth is willing do more than pay hypocritical lip service to the concept.