Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Tsai Yi-yu (蔡易餘) and fellow DPP lawmakers have proposed amending the Additional Articles to the Constitution and the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例).
The text they want to change deals with the goal of cross-strait unification and the de jure sovereignty of the Republic of China extending to all of China.
In response, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokesman Ma Xiaoguang (馬曉光) said: “It is extremely dangerous that a handful of separatists have misread the situation and become unbridled in pushing Taiwanese independence.”
Although the view that Taiwan is pushing for independence under cover of the COVID-19 pandemic has stirred up a wave of calls in China for unification by military force, what Taiwanese should focus on is probably the use of military force to prevent independence.
Perhaps the reason that legislators from all groups within the DPP and the leaders of the party’s legislative caucus gave their support to these supporters of President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) just before her inauguration today was that they wanted to take the edge off the political pressure created by referendums proposed by those who urgently want independence.
Two referendum questions were proposed: “Do you agree that the president should be asked to initiate constitutional reform?” and “Do you agree that the president should be asked to initiate the creation of a new constitution that suits Taiwan’s current status?”
These questions do not meet the requirements of the Referendum Act (公民投票法), which stipulates that it applies to “referendums on laws” and “initiatives or referendums on important policies.” In addition, the president does not have the constitutional power that these two questions call for.
By bringing the question of writing a new constitution down to a matter of amending the Constitution and a law, Tsai Yi-yu and others have likely helped the president shed some of the pressure from radical independence advocates.
However, from the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) perspective, keeping the national title unchanged is intended to cover up the move toward independence, as the proposed changes recognize that the People’s Republic of China holds de jure sovereignty over “the mainland area.” To the CCP, this is tantamount to the creation of two Chinas and a step on the way toward Taiwanese independence.
The CCP thinks “China” is not divided, that its sovereignty and territory are complete, and that it is just a matter of Taiwan and the rest of China being under “separate rule.”
As the wave of calls for unification by military force sweeps over China, the CCP has stuck to the bottom line of its “Anti-Secession” Law — the use of military force to prevent Taiwanese independence.
On May 4, retired Chinese People’s Liberation Army Air Force major general Qiao Liang (喬良) said on Chinese social media app WeChat: “The Taiwan problem cannot be solved with rashness and radicalism,” and until China’s national strength can match that of the US, it should not fall in the “unification by military force” trap set by the US to block the continued revival of the Chinese nation.
However, Qiao also said that China can use military force to block Taiwan’s independence without starting a war.
Taiwan must understand that while China might not be willing or able to follow through on unification by military force, the possibility that it will use military force to prevent independence is increasing.
Kuei Hung-chen is CEO of the Democracy Foundation.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Shortly after Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) stepped down as general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 2012, his successor, Xi Jinping (習近平), articulated the “Chinese Dream,” which aims to rejuvenate the nation and restore its historical glory. While defense analysts and media often focus on China’s potential conflict with Taiwan, achieving “rejuvenation” would require Beijing to engage in at least six different conflicts with at least eight countries. These include territories ranging from the South China Sea and East China Sea to Inner Asia, the Himalayas and lands lost to Russia. Conflicts would involve Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia,
The Sino-Indian border dispute remains one of the most complex and enduring border issues in the world. Unlike China’s borders with Russia and Vietnam, which have seen conflicts, but eventually led to settled agreements, the border with India, particularly the region of Arunachal Pradesh, remains a point of contention. This op-ed explores the historical and geopolitical nuances that contribute to this unresolved border dispute. The crux of the Sino-Indian border dispute lies in the differing interpretations of historical boundaries. The McMahon Line, established by the 1914 Simla Convention, was accepted by British India and Tibet, but never recognized by China, which
In a recent interview with the Malaysian Chinese-language newspaper Sin Chew Daily, former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) called President William Lai (賴清德) “naive.” As always with Ma, one must first deconstruct what he is saying to fully understand the parallel universe he insists on defending. Who is being “naive,” Lai or Ma? The quickest way is to confront Ma with a series of pointed questions that force him to take clear stands on the complex issues involved and prevent him from his usual ramblings. Regarding China and Taiwan, the media should first begin with questions like these: “Did the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) continues to bully Taiwan by conducting military drills extremely close to Taiwan in late May 2024 and announcing a legal opinion in June on how they would treat “Taiwan Independence diehards” according to the PRC’s Criminal Code. This article will describe how China’s Anaconda Strategy of psychological and legal asphyxiation is employed. The CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) conducted a “punishment military exercise” against Taiwan called “Joint Sword 2024A” from 23-24 May 2024, just three days after President William Lai (賴清德) of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was sworn in and