Following President Chen Shui-bian's (
Since 1991, the Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC) has passed through seven rounds of amendments, a high number compared to the constitutional history of other nations. Nevertheless, the Constitution is still far from satisfactory and there have been calls for further amendments. The heart of the matter is that the current Constitution was drawn up for a nation that encompassed China and its vast population, rather than the small nation of Taiwan.
Constitutional amendments face many more hurdles in Taiwan than in other countries. Some of these reflect domestic pressures, such as the desire of conservatives to leave the main text intact, while adding and subtracting articles, to preserve the continuity of the ROC's constitutional "legitimacy." On the international front, Taiwan is also prevented from drawing up a new constitution for fear of international perceptions that it is seeking independence. Amendment is further hindered by the requirement of a three-quarters majority in the legislature to pass amendments. Each round of constitutional amendment has been confined to resolving urgent political matters. Constitutional reform has therefore undergone many twists and turns, reflecting ongoing conflicts and compromises.
In 1990, most people believed that the original spirit of the Constitution tended toward a Cabinet system, and therefore proposed amendments based on this understanding. Following then-president Lee Teng-hui's (
A year ago, the majority of people favored a shift from the current dual-executive system to a presidential system, under which there is a clearer division of power and responsibility. But following the surge of support that brought Ma Ying-jeou (
Now that constitutional amendment has built up some momentum, it should be directed at longer-term goals. The public should be allowed to participate in the debate, there should be bottom-up discussions between the political parties, and the public should be educated about the importance of the nation's fundamental document. This will establish the new constitution as a foundation of long-term political and administrative stability.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of