On Sunday, while attending the celebration of the 58th anniversary of the enacting of the Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC), Chinese Nationalist Party Chairman (KMT) Ma Ying-jeou (
Ma believes that the crisis stems from the fact that an effective way of implementing the Constitution -- and its provision for five branches of government in particular -- is yet to be found. Given this fact, it is ironic that the pan-blue camp has blocked the review of President Chen Shui-bian's (
The National Communications Commission (NCC) is a classic example of how the pan-blues abuse their legislative majority to threaten the Cabinet, forcing the Executive Yuan to consider requesting a constitutional interpretation on the matter. In a recent meeting between Ma and People First Party Chairman James Soong (
The spirit of the Constitution tends to favor a dual-executive system, with the right to nominate the premier vested in the president. The Constitution has no provision for what to do in the case of an opposition majority, and this still awaits the establishment of precedent. It should not be up to the pan-blue camp to make its own constitutional interpretations and demand that the president hand over his right to nominate the premier, despite a complete lack of precedent for this.
Taiwan's constitutional crisis is not simply a question of implementation, for it is an undisputed fact that in some respects the document presents some serious practical difficulties. The Constitution of the ROC has had a turbulent history, for soon after it was promulgated in 1947, civil war broke out and the Constitution was suspended. After martial law ended, the Constitution went through seven rounds of amendment, but as the document had been drawn up in reference to the vast and populous lands of China, no amount of tinkering could adapt it adequately to the needs of a small island like Taiwan. This is the strongest argument in favor of constitutional reform.
Although the pan-blue boycott on reviewing the nominees for the Control Yuan is absurd, it has highlighted the fact that although this branch of government has basically ceased to function over the last year, it has had little impact. Given this fact, would it not be appropriate to change to a three branch system of government? And as the current duel-executive system has resulted in an impasse that has persisted over many years, should not a solution be sought by altering the Constitution? In 1949 the ROC ceased to exist in all but name, and it cannot effectively speak for the people of Taiwan. Can we continue to ignore this problem? Seven attempts at constitutional amendment have failed to resolve the situation. Isn't it time to forge a new path by changing the nation's title and re-writing the Constitution for Taiwan?
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS