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.
Two weeks ago, Malaysian actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) raised hackles in Taiwan by posting to her 2.6 million Instagram followers that she was visiting “Taipei, China.” Yeoh’s post continues a long-standing trend of Chinese propaganda that spreads disinformation about Taiwan’s political status and geography, aimed at deceiving the world into supporting its illegitimate claims to Taiwan, which is not and has never been part of China. Taiwan must respond to this blatant act of cognitive warfare. Failure to respond merely cedes ground to China to continue its efforts to conquer Taiwan in the global consciousness to justify an invasion. Taiwan’s government
This month’s news that Taiwan ranks as Asia’s happiest place according to this year’s World Happiness Report deserves both celebration and reflection. Moving up from 31st to 27th globally and surpassing Singapore as Asia’s happiness leader is gratifying, but the true significance lies deeper than these statistics. As a society at the crossroads of Eastern tradition and Western influence, Taiwan embodies a distinctive approach to happiness worth examining more closely. The report highlights Taiwan’s exceptional habit of sharing meals — 10.1 shared meals out of 14 weekly opportunities, ranking eighth globally. This practice is not merely about food, but represents something more
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
RSS