During a meeting on Tuesday with a US think tank delegation led by former US ambassador to China Stapleton Roy, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) reiterated that the "defensive referendum" he is planning to hold alongside the March 20 presidential election has nothing to do with the independence-unification issue. Chen also pointed out that referendums are a basic human right and universal value, and that he hoped to use the referendum to say "no" to China's military threat. The international community cannot accuse Taiwan of being a troublemaker just because it wants to say "no" to military threats, Chen said.
Chen's remarks gave voice to a humble wish of the Taiwanese people. We only want to be free from fear, as do the people of other free countries. But even a small action has invited groundless accusations from the international community.
For a long time, the Taiwanese people have lived in the shadow of China's military threats. In past elections, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and People First Party (PFP) always tried to magnify China's military threat and thereby hold Taiwanese voters hostage and restrict their choices. United as they are on the issue of military threats, China and the KMT-PFP forces have also used each other, thereby shaping a unique mechanism in Taiwanese politics: The KMT-PFP camp uses China's military threat to suppress the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), thereby restricting the ability of Taiwan to enact political reform.
Because the KMT-PFP camp has a vested interest in China's military threats, it has long been an accomplice and even mouthpiece conveying such threats. When it comes to exhorting China to lay down the cleaver, the Taiwanese people can only rely on the reformist forces led by the DPP.
We are grateful that we can hold free elections in which parties can present their platforms at campaign events. Chen has now shone the spotlight on China's military threat -- the biggest psychological fetter for the Taiwanese people -- and asked the international community to voice its support for justice.
Unfortunately, the Taiwanese people's wish has not been understood. The US, Japan and the EU have all expressed concern about the referendum plan because they fear China's military might.
During the 50 years of KMT rule, the Taiwanese people never had a chance to say no to China. Over time, the international community seems to have taken any Chinese bullying of Taiwan for granted. When the Taiwanese people voice their fears, they are called "provocative" by the international community and Taiwan's own pro-unification camp.
Any visit by the head of state to countries that have no diplomatic ties with Taiwan is provocative. Even former president Lee Teng-hui's (
US President George W. Bush said many times that he opposed any referendum aimed at changing the status quo. If Taiwan's anti-missile referendum is an attempt to change the status quo, then apparently the international community believes China's missile deployments against Taiwan are a reasonable status quo -- the Taiwanese people therefore should work hard to maintain it. It is simply absurd to view China's missile deployments as the cross-strait status quo and to discourage any change to it. The international community should show more understanding for the precarious situation facing the Taiwanese people.
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