President Chen Shui-bian's (
The so-called "negative" reactions stem not from the decision itself, but from the international community's concern that China may react in an "unreasonable manner" and endanger world peace. Such concern has been most evident in the US, Europe and other Western nations.
The reports by the quasi- official Voice of America (VOA), which misquoted Taiwanese officials on the issue, added to the misunderstanding and further complicated the problem. This highlights the need for better negotiations between Taiwan and Western nations to sort out contradictions based on their common, strategic benefits.
Even though the negotiations cannot be held based on the principle of equality given Taiwan's unique position in the international community, they should be carried out based on the principle of mutual respect.
But what clearly needs to be sorted out here is that Taiwan is not what China calls a "troublemaker;" instead, it is the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) that is causing the trouble.
Let us put aside China's incessant opposition to any political or economic ideas expressed by democratic nations and restrict ourselves to looking at cross-strait relations. Taiwan's abolition of the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of Communist Rebellion in 1990 in practice marked the end of cross-strait hostilities.
Nevertheless, China continues to resort to military threats to achieve its goal of unification. Shouldn't the Taiwanese take action to oppose China's behavior? What Taiwan is doing is simply using peaceful means to preserve its sovereignty. If Taiwanese are denied this right, then what does the UN Declaration of Human Rights stand for?
Apart from the West, some countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America have not been particularly "friendly" to Taiwan owing to pressure from China. Russia has been the most vocal in opposing Taiwan. Its foreign ministry recently issued a statement saying that "the decision made by Taiwanese leaders [to terminate the council] is not conducive to regional peace and stability."
What is interesting is that it is Russia's arms sales to China that have prompted the Beijing government to expand the scale of its military drills in recent years. What's more, both Russia and China launched a joint military exercise last year in response to the joint US-Taiwan and US-Japan military drills. It takes a lot of effrontery on Russia's part to now accuse Taiwan of jeopardizing peace in the region.
The negative response notwithstanding, Taiwan has made itself heard in the international community because of this controversy. Quite a number of international media outlets such as the New York Times have had extensive coverage of the incident. Although US-Taiwan relations appeared tense for a period, there are also indications that the issue relating to Taiwan's sovereignty can no longer be ignored and suppressed. It is also necessary for both the US and China to review their Taiwan policies, which have been so disrespectful of Taiwanese public opinion in the past.
In China, some Web surfers have even asked why -- if the council and its guidelines were so important -- no one had mentioned them before. Clearly, more and more Chinese are able to see through how Beijing manipulates the issue relating to independence and unification.
Paul Lin is a New York-based political commentator.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti and 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