On the eve of the "war of the century" -- Taiwan's presidential election -- I have arrived in Taiwan to monitor the election. Although an observer, I have my own stance and feelings about the matter. They did not take shape by accident, and have undergone decades of transformation.
During my 21 years in China, I witnessed human rights being trampled, and lived a life without dignity. After I moved to Hong Kong in the mid-1970s, although I strongly opposed the Chinese regime, I took it for granted that Taiwan was a part of China. In 1984, I visited Taiwan for the first time. Frequent visits increased my affection for the island.
Taiwan has attracted me not only with its spectacular scenery, delicious snacks and simple customs and people, but also by the fact that I have witnessed its development into a democratic country. But China's oppression of Taiwan's democratic development has made me reconsider the unification issue. My perspective has switched from "pro-unification" to "pro-democracy" -- under which people are their own masters, and their will should be fully respected -- and to the self-awareness of Taiwan, which needs to rectify its own name.
First, China fired ballistic missiles into the Taiwan Strait in 1996 to deter Taiwan's presidential poll. I was in Taiwan at that time, and saw the absurdity of the ticket of former Judicial Yuan president Lin Yang-kang (林洋港) and former premier Hau Pei-tsun (郝柏村). Hau's remarks to a rally in Taichung shocked me, because his words sounded just like a "theory of subjugation." Hau was so afraid of Beijing that he was only anti-independence, not anti-communist. Luckily, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) did not attack Taiwan when he was the chief of the general staff. Otherwise, the country would have been destroyed a long time ago.
When former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) proposed the "special state-to-state" model of cross-strait relations in 1998, pro-unification politicians echoed Beijing in opposing the idea. This made me hate their fear of the communists and flattery of Beijing even more.
Second, I had originally wished that China and Taiwan could be unified after China's democratization. But the CCP has always insisted on its dictatorship and refused to countenance any political reforms. Taiwan cannot just sit back and wait for China's democratization, because it might be swallowed up by China before its democratization has been completed.
I have my own ideas about the democratization of China: emptying out the centralized government by local autonomy or independence. Taiwan and Hong Kong are the best examples of local democratization. Taiwanese independence is a good thing. The existence of a democratic Taiwan is actually the best encouragement for China's democratic movement. For those who zealously oppose Taiwan's independence -- where ever they are -- they are helping China to kill its democratic movement and its chances of becoming a democra-tic country, no matter how loudly their various democratic slogans are shouted.
Third, I know that Taiwan does not rule out the possibility of rectifying its name and becoming a real independent state. Due to the post-war cultural separation over the past half century, especially in the development of their political cultures, the gap between Taiwan and China is constantly broadening.
Fourth, some Taiwanese people's national identity is questionable. I am worried for Taiwan if this cannot be solved. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party's opposition to President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) administration through their legislative majority is an important cause of political trouble. I increasingly agree with those who advocate a change to the country's official name, holding referendums and creating a new constitution.
This time, the election and referendum are related to the future of the entire country, and whether each and every individual can live with dignity. The people of Taiwan have to cast their sacred ballots.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS