Washington clarified that the status of Taiwan is undecided and thereby implied that Taiwan is not part of any nation -- including China. This pronouncement unleashed, under the glare of the global media, a tidal wave of Taiwanese soul searching.
Naysaying from foreign governments and political pundits with their disparate yet self-serving motives aside, the single factor Taiwanese should take to heart is how future generations of Taiwanese will judge the conduct of those from this generation.
Should Taiwan's wishy-washy approach persist to eventually land Taiwan in China's hands, Taiwanese 60 years down the road would certainly curse their grandparents for their pusillanimity. They wouldn't cut the current generation any slack on account of the unremitting threat from Beijing, because they themselves would be experiencing the misery stemming from Beijing's promise to mete out punishment on the current generation of Taiwanese who stood in defiance to it.
The oft-repeated caution that the survival of Taiwan's sovereignty depends on blessing from Beijing is a defeatist mindset at work.
Rather, Taiwanese should rest the nation's sovereignty on self-confidence and steel themselves to prosper without a friendly hand from Beijing for an indefinite period of time. Only by maintaining this kind of attitude would there be any chance that Beijing might turn around at some point. Besides, after surviving the last 60 years under the constant cloud of a hostile China, Taiwan isn't entirely uninitiated in handling such a situation.
Another myth countering Taiwan's formal sovereignty is Washington's attitude. The argument has been that Taiwan's survival depends on US military protection and that therefore Taiwan should heed Washington's objections. That actually amounts to no more than a lame excuse.
Should the US military protection of Taiwan be contingent on the strategic value of Taiwan, the basis would hardly change when Taiwan declares formal sovereignty. The belief that a likelier military conflict stemming from Taiwan's declaration of independence would make the US shy away from protecting Taiwan is tantamount to pronouncing that the value of the US aegis should be discounted.
Taiwan's democratization might complicate Washington's dealings with Beijing, but it couldn't possibly have a negative impact on fundamental Taiwan-US relations, which are grounded on the notion of democracy.
That might explain why, reacting to President Chen Shui-bian's (
In contrast to the latter's long-lasting nature, the former is transitory and pertinent mostly to Chen's ongoing squabbles with the Bush administration.
The fact remains that Taiwan's wading through Beijing-instigated international obstacles to continue democratizing could only deepen that enduring trust, one that is rooted in shared values. No wonder empathy over Taiwan's cause among parliamentary members in the EU, the US and Japan is showing signs of mushrooming and could reach a crescendo should the UN plebiscite succeed.
This leaves intact the belief that, regarding Taiwan's using democratization as the sole path to consolidate its sovereignty, Western governments would effect an about-face long before Beijing.
That possibility alone would justify why, in the uphill struggle to answer the call of Taiwan's future, Taiwanese shouldn't wait for a written invitation.
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