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
Within Taiwan’s education system exists a long-standing and deep-rooted culture of falsification. In the past month, a large number of “ghost signatures” — signatures using the names of deceased people — appeared on recall petitions submitted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) against Democratic Progressive Party legislators Rosalia Wu (吳思瑤) and Wu Pei-yi (吳沛憶). An investigation revealed a high degree of overlap between the deceased signatories and the KMT’s membership roster. It also showed that documents had been forged. However, that culture of cheating and fabrication did not just appear out of thin air — it is linked to the
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
Taiwan People’s Party Legislator-at-large Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬) asked Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) a question on Tuesday last week about President William Lai’s (賴清德) decision in March to officially define the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as a foreign hostile force. Liu objected to Lai’s decision on two grounds. First, procedurally, suggesting that Lai did not have the right to unilaterally make that decision, and that Cho should have consulted with the Executive Yuan before he endorsed it. Second, Liu objected over national security concerns, saying that the CCP and Chinese President Xi
China’s partnership with Pakistan has long served as a key instrument in Beijing’s efforts to unsettle India. While official narratives frame the two nations’ alliance as one of economic cooperation and regional stability, the underlying strategy suggests a deliberate attempt to check India’s rise through military, economic and diplomatic maneuvering. China’s growing influence in Pakistan is deeply intertwined with its own global ambitions. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a flagship project of the Belt and Road Initiative, offers China direct access to the Arabian Sea, bypassing potentially vulnerable trade routes. For Pakistan, these investments provide critical infrastructure, yet they also
RSS