President Chen Shui-bian (
Two odd aspects of this situation stand out.
First, Article 17 of the Referendum Law (
In light of this, defensive referendums are based on the premise of national sovereignty. It is strange that the US opposes a defensive referendum in the same way that it opposes independence. We can conclude that what the US opposes is not a defensive referendum, but the premise of such a referendum -- Taiwanese sovereignty.
Second, therefore, perhaps the threat to Taiwan's sovereignty is not only China's missiles, but also the US' verbal threats.
Taiwan should not just single-mindedly focus on China's threats, but also be conscious of the control exerted by the US' hegemony.
Isn't the US trying to deny Taiwan's sovereignty by threatening inaction -- not selling weapons to Taiwan? No wonder some say that if Taiwan became a state or a colony of the US, perhaps it would spend less money paying taxes to the federal government than it now spends buying weapons.
Chen's hasty proposal to hold a defensive referendum has plunged the pan-green camp's election campaign into a muddle. Though he knows that swing voters hold the key to the election, Chen has lurched to an extreme position.
Perhaps Chen should consider making the preamble of a new constitution the subject of the defensive referendum.
Putting the preamble of a new constitution to a referendum would not be amending the Constitution, nor would it be creating a new constitution. It would be a declaration to open up the political future of the people of Taiwan.
As long as the content of a proposed preamble is appropriate, the pan-blue camp would find it hard to oppose a referendum on the issue. Furthermore, China and the US -- the two big nations that threaten Taiwan's sovereignty -- would not be in a position to say anything against it.
But this move could also become a turning point for creating a new constitution or amending the current one on a large scale.
The preamble to a new constitution might include the following four points:
Taiwan has independent sovereignty and a free and democratic system;
Unification can be negotiated when one day China achieves a certain level of freedom and democratic and economic development;
Changes to Taiwan's status quo should be decided by the people through a referendum;
Taiwanese people need a new constitution to meet their development needs in the new century, and the current Constitution must be frozen.
Given Taiwan's fragmentary sovereignty, these four main points might be the best political plan to guard against threats from China and the US. An overhaul of the Constitution is of great urgency if we set aside electoral considerations and focus instead on Taiwan's future.
Yen Chueh-an is a law professor at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Jackie Lin
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