After the 2000 presidential election, former president Lee Teng-hui (
After the KMT and PFP became allies, for both this year's presidential election and the upcoming legislative elections, the pan-blue camp has attempted to focus on issues related to the public's livelihood or the government's achievements while campaigning. However, the direction of Taiwan's political situation mostly focuses on our national status. The issues of whether to amend the Constitution or create a new one, the question of the national emblem and title, and criticism of the KMT's outdated party-state ideology have dominated the campaign. This has gradually become the public consensus.
The pan-blue camp proposes maintaining the status quo, saying that the Republic of China (ROC) is an independent sovereign state, so it is unnecessary to rectify the nation's name. This will both maintain the government's legitimacy and avoid irritating China or triggering a war in the Taiwan Strait.
These statements are not groundless. They are based on realistic considerations and profound historical and cultural motivations. The problem is this: Ever since the early 1990s, a pattern has emerged in the development of Taiwan's rule of law. Taiwan has repeatedly proven through upholding the processes of Western democracy that the nation is indeed an independent sovereign state. Through successive democratic elections, Lee and Chen's administrations have firmly demonstrated our existence.
In my opinion, the mainstream opinion in Taiwan is neither to maintain the status quo nor boost the economy, as the pan-blue camp claims. It is impossible for Taiwan to accept the status quo of not being recognized as a nation. In particular, whether you like them or not, and whether you agree or not, Taiwan's constitutional reforms, especially those in the 1990s, were accomplished through democratic procedures.
Of course, this does not mean that the pan-green camp's accusation that the pan-blue camp is using China's military threat as a campaign trick to scare the Taiwanese people is true. The myth of Chinese nationalism has not yet been broken, and it serves as an emotional basis for a unification by force. This can't be resolved simply by telling the public not to be afraid. Those in power, if they are responsible enough, should be extremely cautious about any possible tragedy caused by irrational factors.
As voters, the only value that we must safeguard is respect for decisions made through democratic procedures. After Taiwan's democratization process over the past half a century, we should certainly clear away accumulated anti-democratic sediment so as to improve the quality of democracy.
We are now in the last phase of our transformation. No matter how the pan-blue and pan-green camps attack each other, both sides believe in democracy and Taiwan's status as an independent sovereign state. Obviously, our problem is external recognition, not internal awareness. How to avoid internal confrontation is the biggest challenge to our democracy at present. Since politicians are so unreliable, we can only hope that voters will act in a mature fashion.
Sun Ta-chuan is the director of the Graduate Institute of Ethnic Development at Donghua University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS