Barely a week passed after US President George W. Bush's speech in Prague lauding democracy before the US State Department began warning Taiwan about holding a referendum on using its natural name in its annual attempt to join the UN.
To its credit, Washington has made it clear that it doesn't oppose Taiwan's UN bid per se. And, while being fully aware of the referendum's meaning for direct democracy, the State Department has also let it be known that although it's not against referendums in principle, it will oppose all Taiwanese referendums that could incur Beijing's wrath. To put it more plainly, the State Department supports privileging Beijing's knee-jerk reactions.
Considering that Taiwan tried to enter the UN as the "Republic of China" for more than a decade and that the applications inevitably died, often without even eliciting a whimper from Beijing or Washington, Taiwanese can't help but wonder about the ruckus this time around.
Objectively, neither name would seem to provide Taiwan with a filament of a chance to get into the UN in the near future. Any difference between the two could only reside in a long-term aspect.
Given that Beijing won't possibly relinquish its UN seat, the name "Taiwan" would have the advantage of at least not warranting an automatic rejection.
In the short term, Taiwanese enthusiasm appears to feed on objections from Washington and Beijing. But the referendum is not only a reaction to the suffocation that Taiwanese endure internationally, but also a natural phase in the evolution of Taiwan's democracy.
It's fitting that any referendum will be held concurrently with next year's presidential election. If the timing enhances the chance of passage, it's only because Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his party might find it hard to mount an effective derailing maneuver while mindful of popular sentiment in an election year.
In the meantime, Beijing's efforts to form an international chorus of condemnation against Taiwan seem to be falling far short. Perhaps most countries find it difficult to support China's cause, which, save for Beijing's belligerence, lacks rationale.
The fact remains that referendums are an inalienable democratic right, regardless of how other democracies, including the US, would wish to give Taiwan's democracy short thrift.
The fact also remains that Taiwanese have a history of taking a dim view of Beijing's animosity. The subject of UN membership might become another rallying cause next year, not dissimilar to the 228 Hand-in-Hand Rally in 2004.
Given incessant opposition from Beijing and the US, and given how determined the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Taiwanese are to go through with this referendum, a classical Mexican standoff seems to be imminent.
In reality, Taiwanese are deciding the outcome with the ballots they alone possess. Should they hold fast and succeed in passing the referendum in a landslide, they would be setting a precedent that would bode well for weighty issues such as a new constitution and also reverberate strongly on Taiwanese confidence for further endeavors.
This partially stems from the fact that Taiwanese would get a taste of how democracy could help them ward off external bullying, considering that the State Department would have no choice but to cower under democracy, while Beijing could continue to huff and puff but not do much else.
Defeatists would claim that passing the referendum would not help Taiwan's case for entering the UN -- at least not immediately. But they forget that old adage regarding the merit of taking the first step on a long journey. They also overlook the point as to why, if the issue were futile, Taiwan's detractors would be so keyed up.
A referendum poses quite a quandary for Beijing. For starters, even if it were passed and even if Taiwan were to proceed with widely derided, quixotic efforts to break open the UN gate, no red line would have been crossed, because Taiwan still wouldn't have changed its national name or its flag. Taiwan might therefore have found a way to sidestep the red line, while constructing a spirited platform for Taiwanese to highlight their plight.
Should Taiwanese use the UN General Assembly session to stage domestic rallies and to amass great numbers of expatriates in front of the UN headquarters in New York to sway the international community, the potential for making the impossible possible should not be underestimated.
Huang Jei-hsuan
California
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