In his Lunar New Year address, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) pointed out that he would seriously consider the feasibility of abolishing the National Unification Council and the National Unification Guidelines. Clearly, on the heels of his New Year speech, Chen has once again told Taiwanese that they should pursue their own direction and refuse to be oppressed by China on the political and economic fronts. I genuinely hope that Taiwanese can give Chen the confidence to pursue such a goal and urge him not to falter in the face of adversity.
However, Chinese Nationalist Party Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) labeled Chen's remarks a "breach of trust," threatening that "Chen is going to pay a high price for his behavior" as if he was speaking on behalf of Beijing.
Is Chen's message actually a breach of trust? Certainly not. If we are concerned about the future development of Taiwan, we should understand that both the National Unification Council and the National Unification Guidelines should have been scrapped when Beijing passed its "Anti-Secession" Law last March. Therefore, "seriously considering" whether or not to get rid of a government agency and a doctrine whose goal is the achievement of cross-strait unification is not at all problematic.
China's "Anti-Secession" Law legitimizes the use of force against Taiwan, which is tantamount to declaring war on Taiwan.
Besides, over the years, China's military has kept an increasing number of ballistic missiles targeted at Taiwan and aimed to establish what it called contingency-response combat capabilities by next year, building up combat capabilities for large-scale military engagement by 2010 and to ensure victory in a decisive battle by 2015. In view of this plan, isn't Beijing simply preparing for a thorough alteration of the status quo in the Taiwan Strait?
We should understand that Chen proposed the "Four Noes" on the condition that China abstain from using military force against Taiwan. However, the "Anti-Secession" Law is a clear indication that Beijing has every intention of waging war on Taiwan. China's actions have invalidated any promises Chen made, for it has already unilaterally changed the status quo by enacting the "Anti-Secession" Law.
We cannot but wonder if it is reasonable for the world to ask Taiwan to keep its promise while allowing Beijing to unilaterally change the status quo.
I would like to urge all the nation's opposition leaders not to be lenient toward our enemy any more, for it has already committed a breach of trust by authorizing the use of force against Taiwan. If we appease the Chinese aggressor, Taiwan will only suffer as a result.
Faced with China's provocative intentions to challenge the status quo in the Taiwan Strait, we should remain unwavering. Thus, scrapping the National Unification Council is a proper reaction to China's constant provocative actions. Only by doing so can we achieve the actual status quo across the Taiwan Strait.
Huang Tien-lin is a national policy adviser to the president.
TRANSLATED BY DANIEL CHENG
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