Today the legislature is slated to review the draft of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and People First Party's (PFP) jointly proposed "cross-strait peace advancement" bill. This bill betrays Taiwan, intrudes on the powers of the executive and violates the Constitution.
The bill's first article specifies that "This law is based on the `five noes' and the `1992 consensus.'" Passing it would be tantamount to turning the "1992 consensus" into law and would irreparably damage the nation's future.
The government has repeatedly and firmly denied the existence of any "1992 consensus." The so-called "1992 consensus" is built on the idea of "one China, with each side having its own interpretation." It means that both Taiwan and China accept the "one China" principle, although each side has its own interpretation of what that means. Beijing claims that "China" is the People's Republic of China (PRC), while the KMT and PFP claim that it is the Republic of China (ROC).
To say that the ROC is China is to follow a strange logic. The international community's standard interpretation of the "one China" principle is that Taiwan is part of China, that it is a local government and that the PRC is the central government of China. It would be virtually impossible to overturn this definition in the international community. Accepting the "1992 consensus" therefore means accepting Beijing's version of the "one China" principle. And that means giving up Taiwan's future.
The bill also means that the legislative branch will intrude on the powers of the executive branch. The Constitution clearly gives the president the power to conduct diplomacy. He or she is the only person who has the right to establish diplomatic relations, and neither the legislature -- nor a committee set up by the legislature -- has the right to represent the country in contact with other governments.
The bill's fifth article specifies that, "The commission may select several of its members to function as `angels of peace' and organize delegations and initiate cross-strait negotiations."
Allowing a "peace" commission to negotiate with China is a clear intrusion on the president's power to conduct diplomacy.
The Constitution specifies that only the president has the right to conclude treaties. Article 21 of the "peace" bill, however, specifies that, "a special cross-strait peace negotiation commission may conclude any kind of agreement with China, eg, agreements regulating direct cross-strait links, protecting Taiwanese businessmen in China ... or a cross-strait peace agreement."
A committee signing such agreements would clearly be intruding on the president's authority.
How can the legislature pass laws that intrude on the president's constitutional rights? The bill is clearly unconstitutional, and Article 171 of the Constitution specifies that, "Laws that are in conflict with the Constitution shall be null and void." Even before the Judicial Yuan has delivered an interpretation, this bill has caused disorder and unease in the legislature and society at large. The pan-blue camp's troublemaking must be condemned by the public.
The pan-blue camp has lost its hold on power. It wants to please China, and the legislature is its only remaining venue to do so. The third article of the draft bill specifies that the members of the cross-strait "peace" commission will be chosen by parties in proportion to their legislative seats. The pan-blues hold a legislative majority, and so they are deeply convinced that they will be able to control such a commission, in order to supersede the executive and initiate some trick to flatter China. The people of Taiwan must keep their eyes on this attempt to betray the nation.
Trong Chai is a Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Taiwan’s business-friendly environment and science parks designed to foster technology industries are the key elements of the nation’s winning chip formula, inspiring the US and other countries to try to replicate it. Representatives from US business groups — such as the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, and the Arizona-Taiwan Trade and Investment Office — in July visited the Hsinchu Science Park (新竹科學園區), home to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) headquarters and its first fab. They showed great interest in creating similar science parks, with aims to build an extensive semiconductor chain suitable for the US, with chip designing, packaging and manufacturing. The
RSS