On Sunday President Chen Shui-bian (
Since the timing and occasion of Chen's announcement was unusual -- he made the remark to some China-based businesspeople in Taoyuan who had returned home for the Mid-Autumn Festival -- it has caused intense speculation. Hopefully Chen will use his National Day speech to clearly demonstrate his resolve and determination to lead Taiwan into a new phase and challenge the obstacles to national development.
Chen should use this opportunity to clarify some of the most urgent issues facing this nation.
First, he must clearly and definitely declare Taiwan an independent sovereign state. He must tell the Chinese people that Taiwan has been independent of China for more than a century, ever since it was ceded to Japan during the Qing dynasty in 1895.
Second, Chen needs to reiterate his determination to carry out constitutional reform. Though most people in this country want a new constitution, some people -- including US officials -- still have concerns. Writing a new constitution will provide Taiwan with a long-term and stable system that will enable its democracy to move forward. Who can deny that there is not a critical need to cut the branches of government from five to three, or to determine whether this country will have a presidential system or a Cabinet system? These changes, however, are not necessarily relevant to claiming independence.
Third, Chen should make it clear that cross-strait peace must be built upon a military balance of power. Since Taiwan doesn't want to annex Chinese territory but Beijing has repeatedly stressed its aim of annexing Taiwan, the people here cannot but ask the government to strengthen national defense and make necessary preparations. As the Cold War showed us, only when there is a military balance between two rival parties can an attempt by either side to launch an attack be prevented.
Finally, Chen should make clear to Beijing and the international community that according to official Chinese statistics, as of the end of last year Tai-wanese businesspeople had invested US$72.3 billion in China, making it that country's largest foreign investor. Because of this financial input, China has been able to transform its southeastern coast into an international manufacturing powerhouse. This is a clear example of the enormous benefit that this nation has given the Chinese economy.
This being the case, there is no reason why China should wish for Taiwan to downgrade itself into a provincial government. Conducting commerce under the "one China" principle would be political suicide. It is necessary for Beijing to deal rationally with the issue of cross-strait commerce.
Meanwhile, Beijing should refrain from arousing nationalist sentiments and confusing right and wrong, in order to avoid deepening misunderstandings and hatred between the people on the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. It should also stop constantly threatening the Taiwanese people.
Many Taiwanese believe Chen must take these steps if this country is to continue to develop and provide for its future generations. The Democratic Progressive Party must make a stand on Taiwan's future if it is to win the respect and support of the international community. To be weak-kneed will only lead to more bullying.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS