On March 15, former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) formally proposed recognition of Taiwanese nationhood at a meeting of the World Federation of Taiwanese Associations (世界台灣人大會). He also laid down the main guidelines for a new Constitution establishing the nation Taiwan.
Constitutional reform is the kind of healthy thinking the people of any sovereign and independent state should entertain, but it was criticized by PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜). He believes it would anger "Communist China" (中共), and that most nations "would not accept Taiwan independence." Such statements once again throw Soong's and Lien Chan's (連戰) slogan "the Republic of China is a sovereign and independent state" into a state of extreme political confusion.
Taiwan is deceiving the world by using the name Republic of China. The world is abundantly clear on the fact that Taiwan is the factual entity and that the Republic of China is a political corpse expelled from the international community. Taiwan still clings to this false status, living out a life in degradation. Soong's logic is the laughing stock of today's society and its only market is the unificationist camp.
To put down the Taiwanese people's hope of independence and sovereignty, Soong even suggested that other nations would not accept Taiwan independence. We want to ask Soong if China, a constant threat to Taiwan, would ask the US, Japan or Europe for permission to invade Taiwan. But when Taiwan wants to build a peaceful, democratic and free country called Taiwan, he wants to ask whether other nations agree. What kind of logic is that? It's ridiculous.
POLITICAL RESPONSIBILITY
The people of Taiwan should ask Soong, who talks loudly of his love for Taiwan, whether he accepts that Taiwan is a sovereign and independent state. We should ask him to be unambiguously clear.
Someone intending to run for president should possess political intelligence and a sense of mission, and call for the people to protect their own nation. Soong, however, scorns the moral courage and political responsibility such a political leader should possess and threatens the people of Taiwan with the enemy. If we really needed such politicians, wouldn't it be faster simply to surrender?
When faced with invasion and an anti-humanitarian dictatorship, a self-respecting people should stand up and protect itself. If the leaders of Vietnam constantly had told their people not to anger China, would it still exist?
Soong's threats about what will happen if we anger China are only meant to consolidate the political thinking and interests of his China-friendly political clique. He doesn't consider the fate and future of the people of Taiwan, and is exchanging the lives of the whole people for his own personal interests.
The KMT has lived through 50 years of colonialist thinking of a united greater China. This is still poisoning the spirit of the Taiwanese people, and many Taiwanese must have been seriously affected by this China poison to be taken in by Soong's and Lien's coarse political lies.
Protecting Taiwan and not angering China are mutually exclusive concepts. Someone who wants to protect Taiwan without angering China only pretends to love Taiwan and does not intend to protect it. How come the Taiwanese people still haven't seen through this kind of politician?
Tzeng Kuei-hai is chairman of the Southern Taiwan Society.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS