As Article 4 of the Constitution states, "The territory of the Republic of China [ROC] within its existing national boundaries shall not be altered except by a resolution of the National Assembly."
But what is the ROC anyway? Where is it? If it still exists today, where are its national boundaries?
In fact, a mere 26 weak and tiny countries acknowledge the so-called ROC. As for leading powers -- such as the US, the European Union (EU), Japan and China -- none recognize the ROC's existence. The state that they are dealing with is called "Taiwan," whose current territory includes Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu.
The ROC is simply the ancestral tablet before which Taiwan's pro-unificationists pray: it was eradicated from Chinese history a long time ago. However, the pro-unification camp has refused to accept this fact, and continues to tightly embrace the ROC corpse. In the name of national unity and completeness, the rest of the Taiwanese people have been forced to pray before the same ancestral tablet.
According to the geography textbooks we study in school, the territory of the ROC includes Mongolia and the People's Republic of China (PRC). ROC territory thus consists of three countries: Taiwan, China and Mongolia. What kind of super-imperialistic Constitution is this, including the lands of other countries in its own territory? Since no one takes the Constitution seriously, perhaps we can act even more ridiculously, and call an extraordinary session of the National Assembly to annex the territories of the US and Japan.
This Constitution was passed on Dec. 25, 1946, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) still ruled China. It was promulgated on Jan. 1, 1947, and came into force on Dec. 25 the same year. Comparing the situation at the time with Taiwan's current situation, we see that our country is still wearing a suit tailored for China 60 years ago, and is unable to shake it off.
Any democratic country abiding by the rule of law has a basic national law. Even totalitarian China has a constitution it uses to show off its civilized behavior. Taiwan, however, still uses the Constitution of a non-existent country -- the ROC -- and because it is inappropriate, it is repeatedly amended.
It has now been amended nine times in all, but problems still abound. What's worse, each amendment leads to a major political crisis, amost splitting the country in two. This is too high a price to pay.
A sound democracy must have an appropriate constitution. The meaning of that constitution can then change with the times. The text of the US Constitution, for example, is simple, and, as times change, interpretations by the Supreme Court serve to further consolidate its spirit. This means that the US can solve constitutional disputes simply by calling for a constitutional interpretation instead of through a major amendment process at high political cost.
In a videoconference last week, former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) gave a speech to US officials and academics, once again stressing Taiwan's need for a new constitution. Lee could well be called the best spokesperson for a new constitution, since the amendments made during his presidency led to political attacks from his political foes, incessant political disputes, and political instability. A constitutional amendment is thus no longer the ideal solution to the constitutional crisis.
A new constitution is now Taiwan's only choice.
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
RSS