It was this month 15 years ago that then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) visited his alma mater, Cornell University. In retrospect, the visit turned out to be a key development in US-Taiwan relations. It would be good to pause for a moment and reflect on the importance of that historic visit.
Lee had studied agricultural economics at Iowa State University in the 1950s, and — after an academic career and work with the Joint Commission on Rural Reconstruction — returned to the US and received his PhD at Cornell in 1968. During this time, he was deeply influenced by developments in the US, observing the functioning of democracy up close.
After returning to Taiwan, he began to rise through the ranks, becoming Taipei mayor in 1978 and governor of Taiwan Province three years later. A skilled technocrat, he came to the attention of then-president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), who eventually made him vice president.
When Chiang passed away in early 1988, Lee was thrust into the limelight, becoming the first Taiwan-born president. In that position, he made the final push toward Taiwan’s momentous transition to democracy, ending the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of Communist Rebellion (動員戡亂時期臨時條款) in 1991, moving toward full elections for all seats in the Legislative Yuan in 1992 and bringing about Taiwan’s first-ever direct elections for president in 1996.
However, internal democracy in Taiwan was only his first objective. He also wanted to bring about an end to Taiwan’s international isolation, which was caused by the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) decades-long insistence that they were the rightful rulers of all of China. A small step in that direction would be a visit to his alma mater, Cornell University. Once he could visit his university, other doors would be opened, or so his thinking went.
From 1992 on, he and his government worked hard — both openly and behind the scenes — to bring a visit to fruition. Initially, this was nixed time and again by the old crowd in the US State Department, who wanted to preserve the legacy of Washington’s 1971 opening to China and had little feel for the democratic and international aspirations of Taiwan and its president.
However, in May 1995, then-US president Bill Clinton had to succumb to pressure from US Congress, which was much more in tune with Taiwan and its democracy. The resulting visit was in a sense rather uneventful — Lee gave a subdued speech, merely extolling Taiwan’s democratic achievements.
However, the leaders in Beijing saw it differently: They perceived Lee’s visit as a challenge to their goals of reining in and eventually absorbing Taiwan. They began the first missile crisis in the summer of 1995; to be followed in March 1996 by more missile firings designed to intimidate Taiwan’s electorate ahead of its first presidential elections. The Clinton administration responded to the provocations by deploying two aircraft carrier battle groups.
In spite of the threats, Lee was elected Taiwan’s first directly elected president, serving until 2000, when he was succeeded by the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).
Lee can thus be credited for completing the transition to democracy, started by the democratic opposition in the 1980s, and for laying the foundation for the peaceful transition of rule from the KMT to DPP in 2000.
While many international observers lauded the second change of political power in 2008 as evidence that Taiwan has become a democracy, we need to remember that Taiwan’s fledgling democracy is still young and relatively frail. Constant vigilance is warranted and we need to voice concern when basic human rights, justice and values of freedom and democracy are placed on a sliding slope.
China is continuing to threaten Taiwan’s existence as a free and democratic nation. Using the carrot of an economic cooperation framework agreement and the stick of its military might, Beijing will continue to try to influence political decision-making in Taiwan in its favor.
At this critical juncture, we need to remember the long road to democracy traveled and protect the legacy left by Taiwan’s democratic opposition and by a statesman such as Lee.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
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