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.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means