Sunflower movement

The occupied chamber

The Sunflower Movement ( Chinese 太陽花學運 , Pinyin Tàiyánghuā xuéyùn ) was a predominantly student protest movement in Taiwan from March 18 to April 10, 2014, during which the parliament building (the Legislative Yuan ) in Taipei was attended by around 400 demonstrators Was kept occupied for days. The movement found national support, especially among students and academics, and ended after concessions from the Kuomintang- led government.

Name of the movement

The choice of a flower as a symbol of the movement was based on the Wilde Lilien movement , a student democracy movement in 1990 that had the lily as its symbol. After a sympathetic florist company had given the occupiers of parliament sunflowers as a gift, these were adopted by the movement as symbols of the “sunrise” in dark times.

prehistory

Ma Ying-jeou speaking on March 29, 2014

After taking over government in 2008, the Kuomintang under President Ma Ying-jeou pursued a policy of opening up towards the People's Republic of China , after the two sides had been hostile to each other for decades since the end of the Chinese Civil War ( Taiwan conflict ). The high point of the new policy was the signing of the Framework Agreement on Economic Cooperation (ECFA) in summer 2010. As a follow-up agreement, negotiators on both sides signed the cross-strait service agreement on June 21, 2013 in Shanghai, which opens up numerous industries in the service sector for investments by the other side. However, the agreement had yet to be ratified.

The agreement met with opposition from large parts of the Taiwanese population; On the one hand, the lack of transparency in negotiations with China was criticized; on the other hand, many feared that the Taiwanese service sector would be taken over by low-cost Chinese providers or that Taiwanese companies would be taken over by Chinese investors, combined with growing economic and political dependence on China. Criticism of the Kuomintang's China course was compounded by growing dissatisfaction with Ma Ying-jeou's domestic policies, which resulted in numerous protests organized by citizens' groups and the opposition.

occasion

In view of the widespread skepticism in the population and the resistance in parliament, the Kuomintang group signed an agreement with the other groups on September 25, 2013, according to which the controversial service agreement with China would only be possible after a series of public hearings with experts and interest groups, and not in the Package but should be discussed and ratified section by section. Despite the concerns about the agreement expressed in the public hearings that followed, the government showed no signs of agreeing to revise its content; instead, the chairman of the Legislative Yuan's Administrative Committee, Chang Ching-chung (Kuomintang), said the deal with China could only be ratified, not revised. On March 17, 2014, a scandal broke out when, after half of the planned hearings, Chang announced that the 90-day period for ratification had expired and that the agreement could now be voted on. The opposition reacted with indignation, there was a tumult and the parliamentary session was broken off.

Occupation of parliament

On the morning of March 18, an angry crowd gathered in front of the Legislative Yuan to protest the government's actions. A group of students, mostly from the Black Island Movement , managed to break the barriers and break into the parliament building and the plenary hall. The surprised police could not prevent more people from flowing in, the hall was occupied by hundreds of demonstrators who barricaded the doors. At the same time, the building was surrounded by thousands of other demonstrators. To avoid further escalation, President Wang Jin-pyng forbade the police to evacuate the building by force.

Demands from protesters and government reaction

The squatters of parliament demanded that the unilateral declaration made by the Kuomintang on March 17 be withdrawn and that a law be passed to monitor all agreements with China. With regard to the service agreement, the resumption of public hearings and compliance with the agreement to ratify the agreement point by point were called for. Furthermore, President Ma was asked to enter into a direct dialogue with the demonstrators. The opposition and above all the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) supported the student demands, which earned them criticism for wanting to use the sunflower movement for their own political purposes.

While President Ma refused to negotiate directly with the demonstrators, Prime Minister Jiang Yi-huah went to the forecourt of the parliament building to discuss with the students, making it clear that there would be no revision of the service agreement and at most a return to the point -for-point ratification is possible. The demonstrators declared Jiang's statements unsatisfactory and announced that they would continue the occupation of parliament for an indefinite period.

Occupation of the Executive Yuan

Enraged by what they saw as unsatisfactory statements by the Prime Minister, hundreds of demonstrators who had previously been in front of the Legislative Yuan broke into the building of the Executive Yuan , the seat of the Taiwanese cabinet, in the late evening of March 23rd to occupy. Jiang Yi-huah ordered the building to be evicted by force in the early hours of the following day, resulting in arrests and injuries to numerous demonstrators and police officers.

Student strikes, media and rally on March 30th

March 30 rally, student leader Chen Wei-ting on the canvas

Protests on the evening of March 30th

Students across the country boycotted their classes to show solidarity with the demonstrators in Taipei, with some support from professors and faculty leaders. Many traveled to the capital to join the demonstrating students in and around the Parliament building. In the meantime, family members and sympathetic citizens provided the squatters with water and food.

In the public discussion about the sunflower movement, media close to and critical of the government exchanged blows for weeks; however, the internet played an important role in disseminating information about the movement's demands and actions, especially social media , which reached young people in particular.

To increase the pressure on the government, the various protest movements called for a mass rally on the route from the Legislative Yuan to the Presidential Palace, attended by hundreds of thousands of demonstrators on March 30th. The completely peaceful and well-organized rally earned the sunflower movement great sympathy and respect across the country.

End of occupation

The Kuomintang government's initial strategy of portraying the protesting students as a minority of troublemakers who endangered the democratic order had lost its credibility since the March 30 mass rally at the latest. Disagreements arose within the Kuomintang given the apparent student support among the population, reflected in opinion polls, and the upcoming regional elections in Taiwan's suburban cities and counties later this year. On April 6, President Wang Jin-pyng publicly announced that ratification of the service agreement would be suspended until the law to monitor future agreements with China, called for by the protesters, was passed. After this concession, the students announced their decision to end the parliamentary occupation. On the evening of April 10, the occupiers left the building to the applause of thousands of sympathizers with sunflowers in their hands, bringing the protests to a peaceful end after 24 days.

Effects

Suspension of ratification of the service agreement

The direct consequence of the protests surrounding the occupation of parliament is the suspension of the ratification of the Taiwan-Chinese service agreement for an indefinite period. The fronts between the government and the opposition remain hardened; Observers suspected that no new developments were expected before the next presidential and parliamentary elections in 2016.

In Taiwanese society

The protests in spring 2014 marked a high point of dissatisfaction with the Kuomintang, who has ruled since 2008, and President Ma. In addition, society was made aware of the service agreement with China, about which few details were known before the protests. During the protests, members of the younger generation in particular publicly acknowledged their Taiwanese identity as opposed to China to an unprecedented extent.

Critics of the movement said that the students had resorted to an undemocratic means by occupying parliament. This was countered by the fact that the Kuomintang government's actions represent the real danger to Taiwanese democracy and that it is a civil right to defend oneself through protest actions such as the occupation of parliament.