Reports that the US is opposing any form of Taiwanese referendum has caused the referendum debate to heat up once again. It is, however, quite surprising that the opposition and government have taken a common stance on opposing US interference in domestic politics.
What I find even more surprising is that it actually has been possible to create a debate about the US opposing any form of referendum in this country, since anyone with a little political sense knows that even if the US opposes a referendum on Taiwan's independence, it wouldn't use such strong language. The reasons why this debate has been heating up at this particular juncture are therefore questionable, for the following reasons.
First, the US has agreed to cooperate diplomatically with China in return for its help in dealing with North Korea. With Chinese demanding that the US clarify its stance on the Taiwan issue, the US leak to the press could be seen as a favor to the Chinese. Even though the leaked information may not coincide with the US position, it has fulfilled the US promise to China to make an "atypical" declaration of its position.
Second, the Kao Ming-chien (高明見) incident has weakened the position of the blue camp. It therefore leaked information that the referendum issue has become more serious, thus highlighting the dangers of the green camp playing with the independence issue in an attempt at saving the situation for the blue camp and unification.
Third, a legislative delegation is currently visiting the US. By the timely release of information that China has put a "red alert" label on a Taiwanese referen-dum, the US, on the surface of things, is simply forwarding the Chinese point of view. In fact, however, Taiwan has achieved longterm peace and stability by accepting US protection, and so long as Taiwan complies by paying its "protection fee," the US will not sit idly by.
This is why the heat has been turned up on the referendum debate at this moment. Add to this that the government cannot avoid holding a referendum next year, and it makes one wonder whether the US is playing its old game of using China to scare Taiwan into paying its fees a bit more willingly by threatening it with opposition to a referendum.
Leaving any conjecture about political plots to one side, my understanding is that the US is very firm in its position that any decision on the final status of Taiwan must have the unequivocal support of the Taiwanese people.
Taiwan is a sovereign entity, with its own people, government, land and sovereign wishes, and it of course has both the ability and the right to decide its own affairs through a vote. That China does not recognize this is another matter. The US is a nation that emphasizes the protection of democracy and freedom and it won't go so far as to openly interfere with or oppose the ability or rights of a sovereign Taiwan to vote to decide its own affairs.
To stress the "referendum spirit" in Taiwan's current political situation is recognition of the fact that the "Taiwan first" concept and the idea that residents should decide their own future have become the mainstream of public opinion. Given the strong Chinese pressure and the dispute over independence, we must actively search for a solution.
So, from a pragmatic point of view, how do we go about letting 23 million Taiwanese decide the future direction of this country? If we really want to realize this idea, we must pass the proposed referendum law (
Trong Chai is a DPP legislator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS