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
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS