by Brian Hioe

語言:
English
Photo Credit: Brian Hioe

AFTER A MARCH marking the one-year anniversary of the start of Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza earlier this month, the Obasan Alliance has come under criticism from pro-independence groups over the third party being perceived as standing with pro-unification groups. This has included allegations that the China Unification Promotion Party (CUPP), which is associated with the Bamboo Union organized crime group, was in attendance at the march. This is not true, in that the CUPP was not present.

Pro-Palestinian activism in Taiwan has often proved an ideologically mixed bag, in a manner unlike other social movement causes in past years. Namely, while traditional human rights groups that are pro-sovereignty such as the Taiwan Association for Human Rights, Amnesty International Taiwan, or Obasan Alliance are present, pro-unification groups such as the Labour Party and Parallel Government are also present.

Indeed, the ideologically mixed nature of the protest was apparent at the march, in that some speakers remarked on being pro-independence or expressed opposition to China’s political bullying of Taiwan on the international stage. By contrast, pro-unification speakers focused criticisms on the US empire, while on past occasions, they also lashed out at the DPP government in suggesting that it was authoritarian.

Nevertheless, the slander of the Obasan Alliance reflects partisan political divisions deeply set in Taiwanese politics. Even as in its comments at the march, representatives of the Obasan Alliance were emphatic that genocide is wrong as an absolute, there is nothing such as bipartisan consensus when it comes to political cleavages in Taiwanese politics. All issues are perceived through the binary split between the pan-Green camp and pan-Blue camp.

The slander directed at the Obasan Alliance, then, reflects how issues are perceived through this narrow lens. China’s nominal support for Palestine, even when Israel is China’s third-largest trading partner and Israel-China tech links are substantial with regard to exchanges in surveillance technology.

Photo credit: Brian Hioe

As such, pro-sovereignty individuals in Taiwan have come to view support for Palestine as a cause that is pro-China, never mind that setting aside other political differences, pro-sovereignty groups in Taiwan may actually along with pro-unification groups oppose genocide. To this extent, some of the online slander also tars the pro-unification groups present at pro-Palestine rallies in Taiwan unfairly. After all, it is not as though the Labour Party or groups as Parallel Government–which may have rose-tinted views on China but do stand for human rights on other issues and often have members with a background in organized labor–are the same as organized crime groups that are pro-China.

The political records of pro-sovereignty groups involved in pro-Palestine demonstrations are unimpeachable. These were among the groups that played leading roles in the 2014 Sunflower Movement and in subsequent demonstrations such as the Bluebird Movement earlier this year. Some organizations have storied histories dating back to the course of Taiwan’s democratization.

Yet this clearly is not something that those who lash out at the Obasan Alliance are focused on, if they are aware of the histories of such organizations at all. This is relatively common when human rights organizations are criticized on the basis of perceptions that they have somehow sided with the pro-unification camp, in that those critical of such organizations do not know who they are.

Such matters prove especially sensitive for third parties, in light of the political defection of individuals such as former NPP chair Huang Kuo-chang and former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je to the pan-Blue camp. However, this fear is then used to target groups that seek to break beyond the traditional binaries that have long characterized Taiwanese politics.

This proves ironic. In spite of that past elections show that the Taiwanese public hopes for alternatives to the current two-party status quo, it is also the case that partisan loyalties are still deeply seat in Taiwan, and this leads to the attempt to relegate issues that do not fit cleanly into the pan-Blue versus pan-Green political framework into this narrow binary. This would be another case in point.

No more articles