Reports that the US is opposing any form of Taiwanese referendum has caused the referendum debate to heat up once again. It is, however, quite surprising that the opposition and government have taken a common stance on opposing US interference in domestic politics.
What I find even more surprising is that it actually has been possible to create a debate about the US opposing any form of referendum in this country, since anyone with a little political sense knows that even if the US opposes a referendum on Taiwan's independence, it wouldn't use such strong language. The reasons why this debate has been heating up at this particular juncture are therefore questionable, for the following reasons.
First, the US has agreed to cooperate diplomatically with China in return for its help in dealing with North Korea. With Chinese demanding that the US clarify its stance on the Taiwan issue, the US leak to the press could be seen as a favor to the Chinese. Even though the leaked information may not coincide with the US position, it has fulfilled the US promise to China to make an "atypical" declaration of its position.
Second, the Kao Ming-chien (高明見) incident has weakened the position of the blue camp. It therefore leaked information that the referendum issue has become more serious, thus highlighting the dangers of the green camp playing with the independence issue in an attempt at saving the situation for the blue camp and unification.
Third, a legislative delegation is currently visiting the US. By the timely release of information that China has put a "red alert" label on a Taiwanese referen-dum, the US, on the surface of things, is simply forwarding the Chinese point of view. In fact, however, Taiwan has achieved longterm peace and stability by accepting US protection, and so long as Taiwan complies by paying its "protection fee," the US will not sit idly by.
This is why the heat has been turned up on the referendum debate at this moment. Add to this that the government cannot avoid holding a referendum next year, and it makes one wonder whether the US is playing its old game of using China to scare Taiwan into paying its fees a bit more willingly by threatening it with opposition to a referendum.
Leaving any conjecture about political plots to one side, my understanding is that the US is very firm in its position that any decision on the final status of Taiwan must have the unequivocal support of the Taiwanese people.
Taiwan is a sovereign entity, with its own people, government, land and sovereign wishes, and it of course has both the ability and the right to decide its own affairs through a vote. That China does not recognize this is another matter. The US is a nation that emphasizes the protection of democracy and freedom and it won't go so far as to openly interfere with or oppose the ability or rights of a sovereign Taiwan to vote to decide its own affairs.
To stress the "referendum spirit" in Taiwan's current political situation is recognition of the fact that the "Taiwan first" concept and the idea that residents should decide their own future have become the mainstream of public opinion. Given the strong Chinese pressure and the dispute over independence, we must actively search for a solution.
So, from a pragmatic point of view, how do we go about letting 23 million Taiwanese decide the future direction of this country? If we really want to realize this idea, we must pass the proposed referendum law (
Trong Chai is a DPP legislator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
As the highest elected official in the nation’s capital, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) is the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) candidate-in-waiting for a presidential bid. With the exception of Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕), Chiang is the most likely KMT figure to take over the mantle of the party leadership. All the other usual suspects, from Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) to New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) to KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) have already been rejected at the ballot box. Given such high expectations, Chiang should be demonstrating resolve, calm-headedness and political wisdom in how he faces tough
RSS