On Feb. 18 at the Munich Security Conference, Chinese Central Foreign Affairs Commission Director Wang Yi (王毅) said that Taiwanese independence forces are incompatible with peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.
His remarks restated what Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Politburo Standing Committee member Wang Huning (王滬寧) said when he met with Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Vice Chairman Andrew Hsia (夏立言): “Taiwan independence is incompatible with peace.”
The use of “incompatibility” is reminiscent of a 2008 constitutional interpretation, which addressed a law that prohibited advocating “communism” or secession, ie, Taiwanese independence.
In 1998, economist and politician Chen Shih-meng (陳師孟) and others applied to the Taipei Bureau of Social Affairs to register the Goa-Seng-Lang Association for Taiwan Independence (GATI) as a local civic organization.
Their application was rejected, as at that time, Article 2 of the Civil Associations Act (人民團體法) stated that the “organization and activities of a civil association shall not advocate communism or secession from the state.”
Chen filed an administrative appeal, but the Executive Yuan dismissed it. Chen then sought a constitutional interpretation, and on June 20, 2008, the Constitutional Court (then known as the Council of Grand Justices) issued Interpretation No. 644, in which then-grand justice Hsu Tzong-li (許宗力) said in his interpretation: “Due to the idiosyncrasies of our history and politics, the Republic of China and Taiwan as two signs are either equal to or inclusive of each other; different interpretations can be made based on different political standpoints.”
In his interpretation, then-grand justice Lin Tzu-yi (林子儀) said: “If the advocacy of either communism or secession, through the means of organization or promotion, can attract some people and win over a great number of people, and successfully convince the majority of the people to support it, be it the realization of communism or the secession, the support for that advocacy should be recognized as the choice of our society, rather than an imminent danger.”
In other words, freedom of thought is guaranteed by the Constitution, and the choice made by the people of their volition should be considered first.
If the government wants people to opt for its advocacy, it should win their support, rather than prohibit them from renouncing the advocacy. As the saying goes: “The nation is founded upon the people and established for the benefit of the people.”
The “incompatibility” as stated by some, if considered alongside Interpretation No. 644, should be reviewed again.
Shih Ya-hsuan is an associate professor in National Kaohsiung Normal University’s Department of Geography.
Translated by Liu Yi-hung
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS