With President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) adhering to the policy of “one China, with each side having its own interpretation,” China has time and again done its best to sideline Taiwan in the international community. Having accepted this so-called “one China” principle, the Ma administration has found common language and acted in concert with China toward the goal of eventual unification. If Ma manages to get enough people on his side to get himself re-elected for a second term, it will, frankly speaking, be too late for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to make any difference, no matter how it presents its policies for relations across the Taiwan Strait.
The cross-strait issue will determine Taiwan’s fate for generations to come, so the DPP should not avoid stating its stance. In 2002, then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the DPP said there was one country on each side of the Strait. Although Chen’s statement caused tensions with the US, it didn’t stop him for being re-elected in 2004. Even earlier, then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) in 1994 offered a direction for Taiwan’s definition as a country by saying that cross-strait relations were “a state-to-state relationship, or at least a special state-to-state relationship.”
The DPP should clearly state its support for Lee’s formula as representing Taiwan’s core interests. In so doing, it would be upholding the direction mapped out for Taiwan by these past Taiwan-oriented national leaders.
It is only to be expected that China would react with threats and saber rattling. However, in this age of globalization, countries and economies are interdependent. If China resorted to force just because the DPP said Taiwan is a country, it would only harm its own interests and its belligerence would find no international support.
So the key question is not what the DPP says about Taiwan’s national status; what matters is that the DPP should show greater wisdom and patience in communicating with countries that support Taiwan and in engaging with Beijing.
DPP mayors, county commissioners and legislators have been given high marks for their performance in assessments carried out by a range of civic groups. The fact that the DPP says Taiwan is an independent state has not stopped people from voting for it. On the contrary, voters can’t help noticing how, under Ma’s “one China” policy, Taiwan is looking less and less like a country in its own right. That, combined with government incompetence and the growing gap between rich and poor, among other things, is why voters have put the DPP back on its feet — more and more so with each passing election.
Big changes are happening in the Middle East, and a “Jasmine Revolution” is starting to bud in China. The right way for the DPP to respond to these developments would be to stress its willingness to cooperate with Chinese people and government, on the basis of equality, to maintain peace and prosperity and to support China’s development into a democratic state. It follows that no Chinese people are untouchable for the DPP, and that includes Chinese officials and those who are seeking democracy. After all, freedom, democracy and justice are the very values Taiwan stands for.
If the DPP keeps avoiding the issue of Taiwan’s national status, it will neither gain the support of the international community nor the support of local voters. Apart from demanding that all DPP members and government officials should work and perform even better, the party needs to stick to its position that Taiwan is a democratic and just country that deserves to be respected by the international community. Such steadfastness would surely win the hearts of the public, so it can be voted back into office and ensure Taiwan’s survival.
Chen Wen-hsien is a professor at National Chengchi University’s Graduate Institute of History.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking