Editor's note: the following text is a translation of a speech made by former president Lee Teng-hui (
As everyone is aware, Taiwan's democracy and freedom were not easily won. Nevertheless, it is quite apparent that reactionary foreign political forces do not want to see the Taiwanese have control over their own country.
Ever since the transition of political power from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in 2000, opposition parties have consistently boycotted any laws proposed by the government, regardless of their merit. This sabotage has left the government stranded and has made it almost impossible for this government to achieve anything.
That having been said, even though it is true that this situation has arisen as a result of the opposition's majority in the legislature, we cannot put the blame entirely on their shoulders.
The electorate put their trust in the DPP to take the reins of the country, giving them access to, and control of, all the resources of government. After they won the election, the DPP should have done all they could to work together with the parties they had previously campaigned against, calling on all Taiwanese to give their utmost for the good of the country. Regarding this matter, the DPP has clearly not done very well.
It is not uncommon for the governing party in democratic countries to have a minority in the legislative body. One example of this would be Japan, where the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has been in government for a long time despite the fact that it is not the largest party in the Diet. The fact that the LDP doesn't have a majority of seats, however, has not left Japanese politics in the same situation as in Taiwan.
Faced with the same predicament Japan has prevailed where Taiwan has failed. For this reason we believe that the DPP could have done more. Since they came to power they have been busy trying to secure their own factional interests rather than looking for a way to solve the legislative impasse. It is no wonder that the DPP was dealt an unprecedented blow in the recent three-in-one local elections. This defeat did not come from nowhere, and the Taiwanese people had good reason to deal such a blow to the party.
Since the DPP came to power, they have been saying one thing and doing another, and they have been consistent only in their inconsistency. Over time, the electorate has gradually lost confidence in the DPP.
During last year's legislative elections the DPP campaigned on the issues of the rectification of the national title and the creation of a new constitution. After the election, however, they unexpectedly changed their tune saying that they could not achieve the impossible.
It is clear from this response that they have not really put enough thought into how to make localization a reality, and have sought instead to placate the people with short-sighted policies.
This kind of thinking does not meet the exigencies of the situation. What everyone wants is realistic political policies designed with Taiwan in mind that will pave the way for the kind of future that we want to have.
There are a number of "Taiwan First" policies brought up during election campaigns that the DPP have consistently failed to follow up on. For quite some time now, the party has failed to understand that the people want to see how these localization policies can actually change their lives, tending instead to go round and round in circles spouting abstract slogans.
For the DPP, the road to localization is full of blind spots: from the declaration of the "five noes," to flinching in the face of rectifying the name of Taiwan and writing a new constitution, from the 10-point consensus reached with People First Party Chairman James Soong (
Given this situation, how could the electorate feel at ease, how could they not feel angry, how could they not teach the DPP a lesson?
Even though the DPP suffered a heavy defeat in the Dec. 3 elections, we cannot jump to conclusions -- that it will not be able to make a comeback in the next elections. Whether or not it can stage a comeback depends on whether its leadership can take a good hard look at themselves. Faced with such a crucial period, we genuinely hope that the governing DPP can place three guidelines on top of its administrative agenda in order to win back popular support.
First, the DPP has to uphold Taiwanese awareness and eradicate any pro-China ideology that threatens the security of Taiwan.
Second, the party has to take the initiative and strengthen Taiwan's national defense capabilities and resolutely oppose China's military aggression.
Third, it has to protect the economic benefits that Taiwan enjoys and should not seek to "actively open" up to China. Thus, the DPP should consider whether or not it will be appropriate to hold the second Economic Development Advisory Conference next month as planned.
The aforementioned three guidelines clearly suggest that Taiwan is Taiwan, China is China, and that Taiwan has never belonged to China. Nor has China ever exercised jurisdiction over Taiwan. In other words, a distinction between these two nations has to be very clearly drawn.
We hope that the general public can join us in supervising the performance of the DPP using these three guidelines and offer a glimmer of hope to the nation.
I also hold similar views regarding the arms procurement budget that has been blocked 39 times (now 41) in the procedure committee of the legislature. The arms procurement budget includes the cost of submarines, which are indispensable to our national defense. When I served as president, I did all I could to purchase submarines from advanced nations including the US, but to no avail.
Ever since US President George W. Bush came to power, US strategy shifted and he agreed to sell eight submarines to Taiwan. However, the governing DPP did not seek to gain the support of the legislature and rather only intended to bring up the subject prior to elections. That is, the DPP only regards the issue of national defense as one of its election gimmicks and has only provoked resentment among the public and given the opposition more ammunition with which to criticize the government.
That is why the issue of the arms procurement budget has been constantly boycotted by the opposition parties, for it has never been broached when it was supposed to be. Failing to make good use of previous opportunities, it is hardly surprising that the DPP has performed so badly in these most recent elections.
Although the DPP has disappointed the Taiwanese in the way it has dealt with the arms procurement budget, the Taiwanese cannot simply sit back and watch without attempting to do anything. Therefore, the Northern Taiwan Society recently launched a fund-raising activity to urge each national to donate NT$100 to support the arms bill and show our determination to defend our homeland.
This is not an ordinary fund-raising activity, but a declaration of war against reactionary forces and is directed at calling on people to defend our democratic achievements. I hope that we can all make a concerted effort to promote such an activity. I also want to once again call on all Taiwanese to come forward to demonstrate our power and jointly defend our homeland.
Lee Teng-hui is a former president of the Republic of China.
Translated by Paul Cooper and Daniel Cheng
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