A forum discussing the draft of a "second republic" constitution for the Republic of China (ROC) was recently concluded. This draft, the writing of which I directed, has produced an active response in all sectors of society. Two main reasons explain why we decided to respond to former presidential adviser Koo Kwang-ming's (
First, Taiwan is an immigrant society. It is the efforts of these people, regardless of whether they came first or arrived later, that has built Taiwan into a political community that belongs to all its 23 million citizens. Taiwanese have functioned in this political community for over half a century, and yet, Taiwan still has not been recognized as a sovereign state by the international community. This has resulted in an increased sense of collective frustration among Taiwanese. As a result, finding a way out of this sense of frustration has become the primary impetus that is driving forward the movement of national normalization.
Taiwan's national title remains the ROC, which was founded in 1912 and was immediately recognized by the international community. Today, however, the name ROC on Taiwan cannot be used internationally, nor can it be changed.
Renowned constitutional expert Lee Hung-hsi (
Pushing for the draft "Taiwan constitution" and de jure independence has idealistic appeal and is consistent with the public's right to write a constitution. This, however, is difficult in the context of the current situation, and it is first necessary to build domestic consensus and determination before it can become possible. Offering a different solution that retains the national title ROC and makes it usable is a milder, internationally acceptable and more practical strategy.
The reason for calling the constitution "The Second Republic of the ROC" is to show the continuity of the ROC, by calling it the "first republic" and maintaining the nation's unchanging identity. But the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government of the first republic was forced by the Chinese Communist Party to retreat to Taiwan, limiting the ROC's jurisdiction to only Taiwan, the Pescadores, Kinmen, Matsu and other islets.
The Nationality Act (
In other words, this is a kind of "national streamlining," but it still leaves the nation's identity unchanged. Following the same logic, although simplified to a "Taiwan constitution," what a second republic constitution does not imply is de jure independence, but rather a constitution for a more streamlined nation.
Second, Beijing has long sown dissension among Taiwanese people on the issue of "Taiwan independence" and is pushing its "united front" strategy to oppose Taiwan independence and support cross-strait unification. As a result, Taiwan has unwittingly fallen into the "prisoners predicament" trap set by Beijing -- with China as the "policeman" and with Taiwan's opposing pan-blue and pan-green camps playing the role of "prisoners."
I hope that by understanding the basic fact that the ROC is Taiwan, we could build a consensus between the pan-blue and pan-green camps and break out of this predicament. We could then ask Beijing to take a pragmatic approach on how it deals with the existence of the ROC, since this is the only practical way to resolve the cross-strait issue.
After the conclusion of the conference, Beijing launched a media campaign that claimed that a second republic constitution in fact amounted to de jure Taiwan independence. I would exhort the Beijing authorities to persist with a peaceful development strategy. Cross-strait peace depends on our leaders, their pragmatic approach to the existence of the ROC and continuous negotiations to establish a new and improved political relationship.
This is the only way I can see to build a peaceful cross-strait relationship.
Chen Ming-tong is a professor at National Taiwan University's Graduate Institute of National Development .
Translated by Lin Ya-ti.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS