President Chen Shui-bian (
I would like to suggest that Chen go one step further. He could ask the Chinese people to sponsor the following opinion polls:
First, should Beijing allow referendums in China? China claims that it is against only Chen's referendum. But does China support the democratic procedure of referendums? Premier Hu Jintao (
Second, do the Chinese people want to kill their son or daughter in an attack on Taiwan? The "one child" policy has limited the ability of Chinese families to expand. Do they really want to take the risk of losing their precious offspring in an attack on Taiwan? Let's have a referendum on whether the Chinese people want to die to retake Taiwan.
Third, how about a poll on reunification? There was a report that students at Beijing University wanted to ask their fellow Chinese whether or not they wanted to reunite with Taiwan. This proposal was quickly squashed. But why? Do the Chinese really want to absorb Taiwan into their new empire? How many really care about Taiwan? Let's ask some Tibetans, some Uighurs, some Hmong, some very rich people in Shanghai and Tientsin.
Four, what is the Chinese perception of the value for Taiwan to be united with China? We could ask several questions. Would the quality of life in Taiwan improve if it was part of China? (By the way, we would need to educate the Chinese about the meaning of the term "quality of life.") Would the income of the Taiwanese be improved? Would the Taiwanese have more freedom of speech, voting, religious expression? If nationalism is the only reason to reunify, what would the Chinese be willing to sacrifice for nationalism? Their environment? Their health? Their lives in a war with Taiwan? Last year I traveled on a moped in the hills around Hsinchu. As I puttered through little villages and ate at small restaurants, I tried to visualize how annexation by China would benefit these people's lives. I could think of nothing. Would either the Chinese in China or the Taiwanese really want to create another level of bureaucracy -- ie, Beijing -- to negotiate their happiness, welfare, economic activities, travel, religious rites and legal system? What type of person in Beijing would want to be posted in Taiwan to oversee the lives, livelihoods and living conditions of the Taiwanese?
Five, do people in Fujian want missiles aimed at Taiwan on their shore? Is the entire policy of uniting Taiwan with China nothing more than a prop for the military? Let's take this mobilization of wealth, people, militaristic policies, international threats away from the military. Who would benefit? The possibility of democracy? The daily lives of the Chinese people?
Six, what province would want to have the military building missiles on the their territory? Tibet? Xinjiang? What cities would want such missiles? Shanghai? Nanjing?
It is time, in the words of Mao Zedong (毛澤東), to have the Chinese people stand up. They should be given the opportunity to voice their concerns about China's aggressive and wasteful foreign policy toward Taiwan. They need to be educated about the consequences. They need to be asked their opinion. To use a variation on an old Chinese idiom: A long journey [to enlightenment] begins with a single thought.
Richard C. Kagan is professor of history at Hamline University.
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