Repeated warnings from the US and China about the holding of a referendum on UN entry under the name "Taiwan" have so far failed to dampen the enthusiasm of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) for its plebiscite plan.
Brushing off the move as an election gambit -- as the opposition and international media have done -- is dangerously over-simplifying the issue.
The referendum is about increasing Taiwanese consciousness among the public, especially younger generations, and making a statement to the world that -- contrary to the view that China bludgeons the international community into accepting -- the majority of Taiwanese do not consider their homeland to be part of China.
This kind of activity is essential if Taiwanese are to continue defending the nation's fragile democracy from absorption by its authoritarian neighbor.
Of course, it is also about mobilizing the pan-green vote. But name one political party that doesn't pull out all the stops to win an election.
Everyone knows that the UN bid, whatever name is used, is doomed to fail, but fear of failure should not be allowed to extinguish hope.
Nevertheless, China is intensifying its rhetoric, with a simultaneous increase in military activity aimed at worrying Taipei, while the US has already made its opinion clear and will no doubt up the ante as the election approaches, using any means possible to scupper the plebiscite.
Nevertheless, it was surprising this week to hear Lu De (
For Chinese officials to talk about using a democratic apparatus to counter Taiwan demonstrates just how riled Beijing's bigwigs are.
Whether Lu had official permission to air his views is unclear, but his words are just part of the usual mixture of threats and coercion that emerge from Beijing whenever Taiwan is planning something it doesn't like.
Government officials here would no doubt welcome the advent of a plebiscite in China and use it as proof that Taiwan's democracy can have a positive effect on its cross-strait rival.
But would a referendum in China really serve any purpose?
The result would be a foregone conclusion, as it is doubtful that anyone would be brave enough to vote against the party line on Taiwan's sovereignty.
Of course there are radical members of China's armed forces who would be willing to attack Taiwan tomorrow, but whether their view would hold sway before next year's Olympics and whether politicians would be willing to jeopardize China's international coming out party remain doubtful.
China has a lot to lose by taking reckless action over what is in effect a pointless vote, but failure to be seen to "rein in" Taiwan would cause the Communist Party leadership to appear toothless and deal a blow to its authority.
Because, despite the massive investment the Chinese military has made in the modernization of its weapons in recent years, doubts remain as to whether it has the necessary equipment and skill to pull off what would be the most ambitious amphibious landing since D-Day. The consequences of failure would be unthinkable. Add to this China's disastrous record of interfering in Taiwan's past elections, and a referendum, however undemocratically performed, would present Beijing with a face-saving compromise and a novel kind of stick with which to continue beating Taiwan.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS