Amid international suspicion over the motive and timing of the March 20 referendum, President Chen Shui-bian (
For those who have questioned why Chen needs to pursue a defensive referendum regardless of the danger it might create, the portrayal of the president as an unpredictable and reckless politician is false. The idea is based on the assumption that the cross-strait relationship in the last four decades has rested upon ambiguities that have allowed both the PRC and Taiwan to interpret the same concept to their own individual satisfaction. Therefore, any unilateral attempt to break such an ambiguous definition of the cross-strait status quo would be considered rocking the boat.
Most people tend to overlook the fact that Taiwan's democracy is an irreversible trend and any attempts to appease Beijing should not be conducted at the cost of the nation's democratic consolidation. Taiwan has always been a valuable asset to the international community with its democracy, economic progress and intensive participation in the world affairs. Without touching upon the sensitive issues of independence or unification, Chen's suggested referendum aims to secure cross-strait peace by asking Beijing to reduce its military deployment and to restart negotiations on peace. Such an effort to institutionalize cross-strait dialogue should be supported by the world community.
Hence, the main international implication of the framework for cross-strait peace lies in its predictability, manageability and responsibility. To rebut the accusation that his referendum move and plan for a new constitution in 2006 may pave the way for a de jure independence, Chen has pledged that constitutional reform will be based on no change to Taiwan's status quo. Moreover, a framework for cross-strait interaction will enable both sides to engage in peaceful contacts in a more predictable and manageable way.
For example, Chen suggested the establishment of demilitarized zones including the removal of combat personnel, equipment and deployed missiles and the creation of a buffer zone to prevent military con-flicts. Those are constructive measures aimed at reducing miscalculations and misperceptions that might lead to military conflicts. Aren't these what the international community was anticipating? The proposal indeed displayed Chen's responsibility to handle cross-strait relations.
Most importantly, Taiwan will show self-restraint under such a framework. Since its aim is to peacefully deal with China without changing the status quo of Taiwan, the international community can monitor the process of cross-strait negotiation without worrying about any unexpected changes.
Referendums are a democratic tool. While some argue Taiwan is using referendums like a hammer to pound people, Chen's framework proposal demonstrates his determination to incorporate the referendum as a hammer to build a house -- a house where people from both sides of the Taiwan Strait can peacefully live next to each other and enjoy democratic progress and economic prosperity.
Whether or not Beijing will react to Taiwan's peace gesture in a positive way is unknown. Given how close the presidential race is, it would be natural for the Chinese leaders to ignore Chen's proposal. Bei-jing, however, will have to face the results of the referendum. If a majority of voters support the frame-work, both sides will have to shoulder the responsibility of international expectation for cross-strait peace.
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