US Republican Stephen Yates, a friend of Taiwan, is questioning the Taiwanese people’s determination to become independent, but the reason is not only that the US and China are strongly opposed to the idea (“Taiwan not ready for independence,” Aug. 6, page 6).
Yates reportedly said that “Taiwan is not ready” and that if Taiwanese were “willing to trade their lives, assets and sacred honor for Taiwanese independence, they would win the support of the international community.”
This could be seen as a well-intended warning and the only question is whether there is any solid evidence to show that the Taiwanese “are not ready.”
Not long ago, Yates visited the Presidential Office in Taipei and he also met with many politicians both from the governing and the opposition parties.
Yates’ judgement, then, is based on the government’s opinion, and President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) wants to “maintain the status quo,” so it is not a matter of not being ready, it is a matter of not making preparations for independence at all.
From this perspective, perhaps Yates has only listened to the official position and ignored public opinion. A referendum in Taiwan would have nothing to do with the president or any political party: Everyone -— the president, legislators and all 23 million Taiwanese — has one vote.
Are the Taiwanese ready? There is no way to know. Taiwan has never held an independence referendum, so how could we know?
The people have a constitutional right to hold referendums and the president or the legislature have no right to continue to ignore the issue.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) spent the past 60 or 70 years making a mess of Taiwan. Is the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) now going to continue to do the same thing?
Passing the Referendum Act (公投法) amendment is a responsibility the DPP cannot shirk.
Let us also look at the two different international reactions Yates mentioned.
First, there is strong US opposition. Who is the US opposing? A referendum is the collective expression of public opinion. Are they opposing 23 million individuals?
Former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) UN referendum was initiated by the government, so the US could put pressure on the president.
This is a referendum that would be initiated by the public, and the public would vote in it and there is nothing the president or the ruling party could do to stop it, so who would the US oppose?
Then there is strong Chinese opposition. Will China be opposed? Of course it will. There is no need to wait for a referendum: It will be upset as soon as the amendment to the Referendum Act is passed. Do we Taiwanese need to worry? No.
Once the amendment has been passed, Taiwan will have one more bargaining chip when dealing with China, as it can hold an independence referendum whenever it wants. The people can also choose not to hold one and they can vote in support of it, or they can oppose it.
As China puts pressure on the nation, it must consider the reaction of Taiwanese. This is a reaction that is backed up by a whole warehouse full of gunpowder.
During the celebrations marking the founding of China’s People’s Liberation Army, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) threatened Taiwan, and the DPP’s response that he was “far removed from Taiwanese public opinion” was far too lame.
With an amended Referendum Act, “Taiwanese public opinion” would not be an empty word and China would need to give serious thought to it before making threats and rattling its sabers.
Chin Heng-wei is a political commentator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS