On Friday, President Chen Shui-bian (
The first question asks voters -- if China does not withdraw the missiles aimed at Taiwan and does not renounce the use of force -- whether they would support the government in buying more anti-missile weapons to strengthen Taiwan's defense capabilities. The second question asks if voters agree that the government and China should begin negotiations to push for the establishment of a cross-strait framework for peace and stability.
As everyone can plainly see, these topics are not in the least bit provocative. All the talk about how a referendum would bring catastrophe is groundless.
In the past three years, China's increase in missile deployments targeting Taiwan has demonstrated an intention to unilaterally change the status quo in an undemocratic and violent manner.
Chen emphasized in his remarks on Friday that he is willing to do his best to maintain peace and security, and that the campaign for a referendum on March 20 is an effort to prevent China from using force and unilaterally changing the status quo.
Chen's remarks are supported by the referendum topics he announced. The purpose of choosing these topics is to reveal China's ambitions to change the status quo, as well as to make the world and people here understand that Taiwan's efforts to strengthen its defense capabilities are purely in response to Chinese threats.
Especially noteworthy is the fact that the "anti-missile weapons" are defensive in nature -- so there is no intention on the part of Taiwan to engage in an arms race with China. Despite Chinese threats, Taiwan continues to maintain goodwill. There is no intention to provoke China or make trouble.
The second topic answers the question left open by the first. With offensive counterattacks ruled out as an option in the face of Chinese threats, what are the peaceful means through which cross-strait issues can be resolved?
Chen is trying to answer this question by forging a popular consensus in support of peaceful cross-strait negotiations.
The referendum on March 20 is in no way intended to change the status quo. Instead, the goal is to safeguard the status quo through the most peaceful means. All the concerns that the US, Japan and Europe have had about a referendum changing the status quo were the result of deception by China. Taiwan's intention to uphold the status quo is consistent with the intentions of Taiwan's allies. From this standpoint, the international community now has even more reason to support Taiwanese people's right to exercise their fundamental civil rights through a referendum.
However, a word of caution is in order. While the majority of people here will support replacing antagonism with negotiations in dealing with China, it is critical that such negotiations be conducted on the basis of reciprocal respect for sovereignty, and under close monitoring by the international community. Without that, there would seem to be little reason to trust China.
The referendum topics are consistent with popular will in Taiwan. Surely, both questions will be answered in the affirmative on March 20 by the voters.
Under the circumstances, both the pan-green and pan-blue camps should offer their utmost support to forge a united front in safeguarding peace.
With China targeting Taiwan with close to 500 missiles -- not to mention countless other offensive weapons -- and also conducting a relentless unification campaign through economic pressure, we do not understand why anyone continues to say that China poses no immediate threat to Taiwan's peace and security.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS