Accusations of ethnic divisions have been used to legitimize protests following the presidential election. Taiwan does have an ethnicity problem, but not to the extent that it should be labeled "ethnic division." Nor is it true that the pan-green camp's campaign methods provoked ethnic division. President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) "one country on each side" of the Taiwan Strait model concerns national recognition and is unrelated to ethnicity, but it has been deliberately used by some politicians to stir up ethnic conflict.
What does identification with Taiwan and the Republic of China (ROC), or with China, have to do with ethnicity? This becomes an ethnic issue only if you consider yourself living in "Taiwan Pro-vince," a Chinese citizen in a country divided by the "one country on each side" model. The number of Hakka voting for Chen also increased significantly, showing that the ethnic problem is improving.
Pan-blue voters also come from different ethnic groups. Are they divided? There is a localization faction in the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), and the pan-green camp includes an association of Mainlanders for Taiwan independence. This implies that there is no division.
Irrational statements and actions in the wake of the election divide not ethnic groups, but the nation. This is a serious issue.
First, some people in the pan-blue camp do not recognize the legally elected president. People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) has said that Chen is appointing himself president, and former DPP chairman Hsu Hsin-liang (許信良) said that KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and Soong won. Who is Hsu to say so? A representative of the Central Election Commission? The kingmaker behind Lien and Soong? Or does he represent Beijing in offering them the imperial robe?
Doubting the election results or demanding a recount is fine, but it has to be done according to legal procedures. If an individual can make decisions on this, that or the other, and even decide who will be president, the country is doomed.
Second, some people in the pan-blue camp want to stop the presidential inauguration, accusing Chen of having stolen the nation. Before the recount process has been completed, regular activities should continue as usual. Should all activity cease just because a few people claim that "the nation has been stolen?" Does that invalidate all legisla-tion? Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) recognizes that Chen and Lu were legally elected and Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) will follow the law and participate in the inauguration, clearly displaying their understanding of the concept of the rule of law.
The suggestion that Chen and Vice President Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) were illegally elected and that Wang should be made acting president is ridiculous. According to the Constitution, the premier takes over if the president and the vice president are incapable of carrying out their duties.
Third, the groundless accusations of Chen's stealing the nation caused pan-blue Taipei City councilors to take down his picture in the City Council's chamber, as if they had their own head of state. So did some overseas Chinese associations. Who do they recognize as president? If it is Lien, aren't they dividing Taiwan into two nations? Talk of separate rule for the north and south is yet another bid to divide the nation.
These attempts hurt both domestic solidarity and Taiwan's image. The Democratic Progressive Party must take a softer approach and show sincerity in working for ethnic integration and to prevent provocation. Many intelligent people inside the KMT are also trying to block nation-dividing actions. United, these two forces would reveal attempts at national and ethnic division for the people to reject.
Paul Lin is a commentator based in New York.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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
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
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS