Despite the fact that it needs final approval by the party congress, the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) Central Executive Committee passed the party's "normal country" draft resolution last Thursday.
In addition to recognizing the so-called "five abnormalities" of the nation's international relations, constitutional system, national identity, social justice and party competition, the draft document summed up the key policies the party has been pursuing since it came to power in 2000 -- changing the name of the nation and state-owned entreprises, constitutional re-engineering, joining the UN and the implementation of transitional justice.
The passage of the resolution coincided with the latest statements made by Dennis Wilder, senior director for Asian affairs at the US National Security Council, that the Republic of China (ROC) is an "undecided issue" and therefore neither Taiwan nor the ROC can be considered a country.
The main goal of the resolution is to normalize Taiwan as a sovereign nation. It advocates the deepening of Taiwan's democratic values and of a Taiwanese "consciousness" and suggests the government hold a national referendum at an "appropriate time" to demonstrate public opinion and the nation's sovereignty.
Before the 2000 presidential election, the DPP passed the "Resolution regarding Taiwan's future" with the aim of eliminating international concerns that the party and its candidate, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), were Taiwanese independence fundamentalists. The party's charter said it advocated the establishment of a Republic of Taiwan -- which could be considered by the international community as a move toward de-jure independence.
The campaign strategy of the Chen camp was to introduce a "new middle way" to cross-strait relations. The DPP had to work with Chen to elaborate a moderate and realistic approach to win over more moderate voters while at the same time remaining true to the party's existing values, such as recognizing Taiwan as an independent and sovereign country, that the status of the nation must be decided only by Taiwanese through a referendum and, most importantly, the rejection of the "one China" principle and the "one country, two systems" model.
Another key characteristic of the resolution was to accept that the name of the country is the "Republic of China" under its Constitution, while emphasizing the fact that Taiwan's jurisdiction extends only to Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu and its affiliated islands and territorial waters.
There is no doubt that Chen played a pivotal role in the passage of the 1999 resolution, leading the DPP to become a political force with moderate voters.
Eight years later, the DPP is looking to pass the "normal country" resolution to pave the way for its presidential nominee, Frank Hsieh (謝長廷), to win next year's presidential election. Most importantly, to avoid any misinterpretations, Hsieh's camp has successfully incorporated a good deal of pragmatism in the drafting process.
Safeguarding the nation's democracy and independent sovereignty, consolidating Taiwanese identity, ensuring the people's democratic right to hold a referendum to decide their future and rejecting China's political absorption of Taiwan are values shared by both resolutions. It shows both continuity and a transformation of the DPP's values.
But what differentiates the two resolutions is the fact that the former says the ROC is the name of the nation while the latter clearly suggests that it cannot be effectively used in the international community. Therefore, it advocates the use of "Taiwan" when applying for membership of major international organizations. It also says that in order to connect Taiwan with the rest of the world the nation should adopt the Gregorian calendar and stop using the ROC, or minkuo, calendar.
This decision is timely and correct because it represents mainstream public opinion and reflects political reality when it comes to Taiwan's international presence. The name ROC is often misleading and confuses the international community. The stress on the use of the name "Taiwan" will constantly remind the rest of the world that Taiwan and the People's Republic of China are two different political entities.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
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