Today will see another review of the pan-blue camp's proposed amendments to the Statute Governing the Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (
The proposed amendments will see all restrictions on cross-strait transport lifted just three months after the amendments become law. Both academics and government officials have warned that such an action is risky as three months is nowhere near enough time to solve all the technical issues involved in establishing direct links, not to mention dealing with the increased threat to national security the simplified regulations present.
But in its haste to please its benefactors in Beijing, the pan-blue camp, under the pretext that the relaxations will be good for the economy, is determined to hastily push through the amendments.
The pan-blues' rationale for taking the initiative and forcing through the bill is that the Democratic Progressive Party government, with its "anti-China bias," is purposely dragging its feet when it comes to negotiating the issue with the Chinese government. In reality it is the Chinese government's refusal to deal directly with any government-level institution, or anything that gives Taiwan a semblance of sovereignty, that is causing the delay. The government is rightfully unwilling to downgrade Taiwan's sovereign status. But still, the pan-blues are willing to play along with Beijing's demands, and laughably deny that the issue has anything to do with sovereignty.
This is the same pan-blue camp that constantly urges the president to uphold the institutions of the Republic of China while at home and abroad, but the very next minute attempts to downgrade it to the status of a local Chinese government in compliance with Beijing's humiliating demands.
The pan-blue camp would do well to step back and consider two important issues. If it decides to bypass the government on this issue, the pan-blue camp will set a dangerous precedent that will affect it if it is returned to power. Usurping the power of a democratically elected government will damage government institutions, such as the Mainland Affairs Council, beyond repair and goes against the spirit of the Constitution.
Another important consideration for the pan-blues is the reaction of the Taiwanese public, because whether they like it or not, Taiwan is a democracy. The Taiwanese are a pragmatic bunch, and they are probably willing to trade some of the trappings of sovereignty for lasting security and prosperity, but they will also defend their democracy to the last, and fight against anything that threatens it.
And as the People First Party discovered with its "cross-strait peace advancement" bill, which was quietly sidelined before last December's local government elections when it became clear how unpopular it was, not everything that Beijing would like to impose upon Taiwan in the name of prosperity goes down well with the Taiwanese public.
The government is in a no-win situation on this issue: It is vilified by the pan-blues if it refuses to speed up the process, but if it goes ahead with relaxing the regulations and national security is compromised then it will receive equal amounts of scorn from the public.
One solution would be for the government and the pan-blues to negotiate an agreement that satisfies the immediate needs of Taiwanese businesspeople for direct flights and sea links, yet at the same time safeguards the nation's sovereignty and national security; a compromise that unfortunately, in the current political climate, seems unlikely.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
A report by the US-based Jamestown Foundation on Tuesday last week warned that China is operating illegal oil drilling inside Taiwan’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off the Taiwan-controlled Pratas Island (Dongsha, 東沙群島), marking a sharp escalation in Beijing’s “gray zone” tactics. The report said that, starting in July, state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp installed 12 permanent or semi-permanent oil rig structures and dozens of associated ships deep inside Taiwan’s EEZ about 48km from the restricted waters of Pratas Island in the northeast of the South China Sea, islands that are home to a Taiwanese garrison. The rigs not only typify
RSS