What exactly can we expect from President Chen Shui-bian's (
The younger generation in the Democratic Progressive Party suggested that Chen incorporate some new cultural ideas to embrace the "Republic of China" factions to bridge the Taiwan-China dichotomy and pursue national reconciliation. The more fundamentalist pro-independence ideologues argued that Chen needed to keep pursuing sovereignty and stick to his plan of holding a referendum to push for a new constitution.
The president is not only being pressured locally; the US has also applied tremendous influence to prevent Chen sending the wrong message to China. The context and process of constitutional reform are the main concern in Washington's constant reminders to the Chen administration.
Not to mention that Beijing has already denounced Chen's inauguration and is portraying his proposal of establishing a peace and stability framework across the Taiwan Strait as nothing but a lie. Let's not rule out the possibility of China sabotaging Taiwan's bid for observer status in the World Health Assembly on May 17 as a gift for Chen's inauguration.
All these elements pose severe challenges to Chen. To what extent can he deliver a speech, as he has proposed, that would satisfy the domestic audience and please both the George W. Bush administration and the international community at large, while at the same time giving Beijing no excuse to accuse him of damaging cross-strait relations?
Chen's inaugural speech should entail at least three elements when it touches upon relations with China and the US. He must acknowledge that Taiwan has gone through a contested election and, most importantly, a hard battle for democracy. He has a strong belief that electoral disputes can be resolved through judicial processes. Therefore, preserving democracy in Taiwan should transcend partisan differences and serve as the nation's highest goal. In the face of China's continued antagonism against him, Chen should take a moderate approach and utilize the principle of democracy and peace to win over international support. While stressing the common cultural heritage shared by China and Taiwan, Chen could make a pledge to the international community that he supports a peaceful resolution of the differences between the two countries.
Offering an olive branch to his counterpart does not mean making concessions. The message that Chen should send to Beijing is that people on both sides of the strait should make a joint effort to demonstrate to the world that their common heritage is not a burden, but a solid pillar on which to build decent and stable self-government.
Finally, Chen must convince Washington that he would not take advantage of the friendship between Taiwan and the US, and that his proposed constitutional reforms are aimed at improving government efficiency. These reforms will have no bearing on changing the status quo, nor on altering the name or territory of the country. The US went through a similar test of fire 200 years ago when it created a federal constitution that has governed American democracy for two centuries.
Changing the constitution is obviously important. It is something to be welcomed, not something to be feared. And while the US constitution has proved to be a remarkably effective document, it has nevertheless been amended several times. Constitutional changes should never be undertaken lightly, but neither should they be avoided if they will help to deepen the very democracy a constitution is meant to serve.
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