The main theme of the "defensive referendum" proposed by President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) is finally beginning to get some attention. Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Deputy Secretary-General Lee Ying-yuan (李應元) said on Tuesday that two examples of good topics for a referendum would be the "one country, two systems" model and on whether China should dismantle the missiles aimed at Taiwan.
Lee's timely clarification finally clears the doubts in Taiwan and abroad surrounding Chen's suggestion. It is obvious that the two topics now broached by the DPP do not touch on the unification-independence issue, nor do they conflict with Chen's "five noes."
Opposition to the "one country, two systems" model and anger over China's armed threats is common to all Taiwanese people. Using a defensive referendum to alert the international community to this situation and to win international support is a legitimate way for Taiwan to break through China's wall of threats. We do not believe that friendly countries, including the US, will oppose such action.
The DPP's fight for the referendum legislation -- which was ultimately successful once the blue camp agreed to support it, creating the first referendum legislation in the Chinese world -- allowed Chen to demonstrate to the Taiwanese people the bravery, experience and determination that a national leader should possess when leading Taiwan.
The blue camp's legislative majority meant the Referendum Law (公民投票法) was far from perfect, with many articles restricting the power of the people. Nevertheless, we finally have a legal basis for holding a referendum.
One year ago, when referendum legislation was promoted by no one except DPP Legislator Trong Chai (蔡同榮) and Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) lawmakers, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-People First Party (PFP) alliance made only sarcastic remarks about it, such as "a referendum law will bring disaster to the Taiwan Strait." Were it not for the DPP taking the initiative, who would have expected that Taiwan finally would get a Referendum Law?
Representing the old KMT power, both the KMT and the PFP have played a feudal, reactionary role when it comes to constitutional reform. During the KMT's rule, political reform was always initiated by the tang wai (黨外, "outside the party") forces and later the DPP. The price was imprisonment and political persecution of many democracy activists.
Now, even though the KMT and the PFP are in opposition, their reactionary instincts remain unchanged. At one point, they strongly resisted enacting a referendum law. Even Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) made the absurd accusation, by quoting a Taiwanese businessman, that the political environment in which the government was promoting referendums was like the Chinese Cultural Revolution.
As the ruling DPP continued to press the issue, however, the KMT-PFP alliance finally found no other way out than to present its own version. Although the DPP's version was overridden during the legislative process, the creation of the Referendum Law was a historically significant victory for the people of Taiwan.
Judging from the several township-level referendums conducted recently, rational and peaceful voting has finally replaced the previously frequent bloody protests by local residents. It only goes to show that Ma's remarks reflected his reactionary mentality. In other words, without referendums, people expressed themselves using violence; now that the referendum exists, they voice their opinions using the ballot.
The birth of the Referendum Law has once again highlighted the lonely, difficult role the DPP has played throughout the nation's development toward democracy. In the face of China's military threats, and carrying the great burden of opposing the blue camp, the DPP is now leading the Taiwanese people on its march forward.
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