In the face of China's growing military threat, President Chen Shui-bian (
The first is to ensure that "the democracy of Taiwan -- a core member of the world's community of democracies -- is not threatened or destroyed by China through non-peaceful means." The second is to "join with the other members of the global `community of democracies' in assisting non-democratic nations, such as China, to develop democracy." The third is "to explore ways to normalize relations and resume dialogue with China under a peace and stability framework for cross-strait interaction, thereby promoting stability and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region."
This "new balance" is a framework being promoted by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government, and it is based on the twin tenets of Taiwanese democracy and cross-strait peace. In the past, the cross-strait issue has been confined to the unification-independence debate.
During the rule of Chiang kai-shek (
In the Chiang era, the cross-strait issue was viewed as an internal matter for China, but under former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) it evolved into what he called "special state-to-state" relations. From this point on, the power struggle between the KMT and the CCP morphed into something altogether different -- from a battle for who would rule all of China, to a fight over Taiwan's sovereignty.
The fundamental nature of China-Taiwan relations has now changed. China should now treat Taiwan as an independent nation of equal status. This is the only way it can comprehensively resolve the ongoing conflict and establish a structure for good relations.
Unfortunately, Chinese leaders are still stuck in outmoded ideas of a power struggle with Taiwan. China has proposed numerous absurd policies under the "one China" paradigm in their efforts to appeal to the Taiwanese people. At the same time, Beijing is expanding its military and enhancing its deployments in an effort to force Taiwan's submission through the threat of attack.
Most worrying is that the international community -- whether because of a misunderstanding of history or because they have succumbed to Chinese pressure -- is unable to see the real situation in the Taiwan Strait, and continues to see the cross-strait issue as a power struggle. As a result, Taiwan's ability to survive in the international community is undermined.
The concept of a new power balance in the Strait breaks through the "one China" lie by telling the international community that the reality of the situation is that there is one country on each side of the Strait. It also identifies Taiwan's sovereignty and independence with its democracy by highlighting the difference between a system of savage communism and a civilized liberal democracy, and stressing that the two countries have no jurisdiction over each other.
In other words, the conflict between China and Taiwan involve not only a struggle over sovereignty, but also a contradiction between communism and democracy. China's threat to Taiwan is a threat to all democratic countries. Moreover, China's missiles can already reach India, Russia, the entire US, Australia and New Zealand. This is proof that China's rise is not peaceful, but rather a serious threat to global stability.
We cannot deny the great imbalance in national power between Taiwan and China. Taiwan must side with democratic countries such as the US, Japan and the EU member states to be able to resist China's ambition to annex Taiwan.
When Chen proposed the concept of a new power balance, he linked Taiwanese democracy to cross-strait peace, and tied Taiwanese security to the development and stability of democratic countries around the world. This is praiseworthy. His goal in proposing this concept in the face of China's military threat was not only to defend Taiwan, but to become a pillar of strength for democratic states around the world who are also resisting communist totalitarianism.
Whether we look to history or international law, Taiwan's sovereignty and independence are undeniable facts. Given Taiwan's disadvantages, economic development and a more robust national defense remain the only ways to guarantee that our sovereignty will not be violated.
Translated by Perry Svensson and Ian Bartholomew
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