On March 15, former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) formally proposed recognition of Taiwanese nationhood at a meeting of the World Federation of Taiwanese Associations (世界台灣人大會). He also laid down the main guidelines for a new Constitution establishing the nation Taiwan.
Constitutional reform is the kind of healthy thinking the people of any sovereign and independent state should entertain, but it was criticized by PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜). He believes it would anger "Communist China" (中共), and that most nations "would not accept Taiwan independence." Such statements once again throw Soong's and Lien Chan's (連戰) slogan "the Republic of China is a sovereign and independent state" into a state of extreme political confusion.
Taiwan is deceiving the world by using the name Republic of China. The world is abundantly clear on the fact that Taiwan is the factual entity and that the Republic of China is a political corpse expelled from the international community. Taiwan still clings to this false status, living out a life in degradation. Soong's logic is the laughing stock of today's society and its only market is the unificationist camp.
To put down the Taiwanese people's hope of independence and sovereignty, Soong even suggested that other nations would not accept Taiwan independence. We want to ask Soong if China, a constant threat to Taiwan, would ask the US, Japan or Europe for permission to invade Taiwan. But when Taiwan wants to build a peaceful, democratic and free country called Taiwan, he wants to ask whether other nations agree. What kind of logic is that? It's ridiculous.
POLITICAL RESPONSIBILITY
The people of Taiwan should ask Soong, who talks loudly of his love for Taiwan, whether he accepts that Taiwan is a sovereign and independent state. We should ask him to be unambiguously clear.
Someone intending to run for president should possess political intelligence and a sense of mission, and call for the people to protect their own nation. Soong, however, scorns the moral courage and political responsibility such a political leader should possess and threatens the people of Taiwan with the enemy. If we really needed such politicians, wouldn't it be faster simply to surrender?
When faced with invasion and an anti-humanitarian dictatorship, a self-respecting people should stand up and protect itself. If the leaders of Vietnam constantly had told their people not to anger China, would it still exist?
Soong's threats about what will happen if we anger China are only meant to consolidate the political thinking and interests of his China-friendly political clique. He doesn't consider the fate and future of the people of Taiwan, and is exchanging the lives of the whole people for his own personal interests.
The KMT has lived through 50 years of colonialist thinking of a united greater China. This is still poisoning the spirit of the Taiwanese people, and many Taiwanese must have been seriously affected by this China poison to be taken in by Soong's and Lien's coarse political lies.
Protecting Taiwan and not angering China are mutually exclusive concepts. Someone who wants to protect Taiwan without angering China only pretends to love Taiwan and does not intend to protect it. How come the Taiwanese people still haven't seen through this kind of politician?
Tzeng Kuei-hai is chairman of the Southern Taiwan Society.
Translated by Perry Svensson
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS