President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) recently said that China's People's Liberation Army has deployed 496 missiles in Guangdong, Jiangxi and Fujian provinces to threaten Taiwan.
His suggestion that a defensive referendum be held together with the presidential election on March 20 has triggered severe criticism from the pan-blue camp. Pan-blue legislators also questioned the president's divulging the exact number of missiles deployed against Taiwan, saying that it was an act of "leaking state secrets."
Such a paradoxical statement applies pro-China thinking to cover up the fact that China is stepping up its military presence in the Taiwan Strait. We wonder which country is referred to when pan-blue leaders and lawmakers accuse Chen of leaking "state secrets."
That China's submarines and missiles pose a threat in the Taiwan Strait is a longstanding fact known to all. As head of state and commander in chief of the armed forces, Chen has the responsibility and obligation to clearly inform the people of Taiwan and the international community about the enemy's threat to the nation.
With this information, the people will not misjudge the situation and blindly believe that China no longer poses a threat, or drop their guard to allow enemies to approach our doorstep without our having any sense of crisis.
When Iraq invaded Kuwait and Iraqi troops arrived at the Kuwaiti royal palace, the Kuwaiti people saw nothing unusual in their presence, thinking Iraq was using Kuwaiti land to conduct a military drill. Iraqi troops therefore easily took cities and seized other territory. When it was too late to do anything, Kuwaitis realized they had been plunged into misery and suffering.
This is a good lesson for the people of Taiwan.
We also have to ask why the pan-blue camp purposely glosses over China's military threat. Why did they turn around to attack their own leader when they should have denounced China's armed threat?
Moreover, the Ministry of National Defense reported in a legislative meeting in October that Beijing is aiming nearly 500 missiles at Taiwan. The number disclosed by the president, 496 missiles, is no secret at all, yet the pan-blue camp makes an issue of it.
Did it do so simply for the sake of opposing him?
China has used the rapid growth of its military strength in recent years to attack and isolate Taiwan diplomatically and it has also used every possible means to put pressure on Taiwan's international space and visibility. Even more seriously, Beijing has vowed not to give up the option of armed invasion of Taiwan. To accomplish its goal of unifying China and "liberating" Taiwan, Beijing has tried to threaten Taipei with pen and sword, and used commerce to put political pressure on Taiwan.
China's old unification tricks, along with missiles and submarines, and warfare strategies such as "unlimited war" and asymmetrical warfare, pose immediate threats to Taiwan.
Under such circumstances, how can a responsible head of state act like an ostrich and intentionally ignore or avoid the facts?
Certain blue-camp legislators do not care about the safety of the nation and its people, nor do they make an effort to understand the true nature of the Chinese threat. Instead, they attack the president by accusing him of leaking confidential information. Their intentions are indeed questionable. No wonder the people are dissatisfied with the Legislature's performance.
Now, there is the Referendum Law (
Anyone with the most basic legal or democratic sense knows that none of the referendum laws of other countries is as ridiculous as Taiwan's, which stipulates that all referendum proposals need to be reviewed by a Referendum Review Committee, formed by the head of the Central Election Committee and representatives from all political parties proportionally to their representation in the Legislature. Whoever controls the legislative majority controls everything about the referendum. In view of such restrictions, the Referendum Law is perhaps the most anti-democratic of its kind in the world. This is indeed a retreat for democratic politics in Taiwan.
Although the new law is preposterous, it fortunately contains Article 17, which allows for a defensive referendum. This may be the only redeeming feature of this wicked law.
The defensive referendum article says that "when the nation is exposed to an external threat which threatens a change in national sovereignty, the president may, following a resolution by the Cabinet, place matters of national security before the public for decision in a national referendum."
In other words, given a concrete hostile threat that threatens to change the status of Taiwan's sovereignty -- China still has not given up its threat of attacking Taiwan, it has repeatedly tried every method to annex Taiwan, and it has ambitions to "unify China" -- this is the best time to hold a defensive referendum.
At a time when the enemy is still not on our doorstep, a defensive referendum is certainly the best way to demonstrate the public's determination to oppose the enemy and protect Taiwan's sovereignty, and to consolidate the power of the "soft national defense" that the people want. It is not an armed provocation, nor is it a referendum on independence. It is, rather, a referendum to oppose Chinese armed invasion. What reason could China or the international community have to oppose this? What excuse could the blue camp come up with to oppose and block this?
If the people cannot choose their own future in next year's presidential election, do they then have to wait until China invades, and, while fighting a war, organize a referendum to decide their own fate?
Taiwan's political situation is exceptional. Historically, Taiwan has spent most of its time under colonial rule or under the rule of Chinese governments, and the people of Taiwan are ruled by a Constitution created in 1946, one not compatible with the nation's current situation.
What crime have the people of Taiwan committed? Why do they have to suffer both international restrictions and the threat of China's regional hegemony? Fortunately, Taiwan is a democratic country where the people can elect their representatives and leaders, and in the future they will also be able to choose their way of life in a national referendum.
The whole world knows that as long as China doesn't give up its armed threats, it is an impossibility that the Asian region will remain peaceful.
It cannot be guaranteed that the lives, property and happiness of the Taiwanese people will still exist tomorrow.
We must consolidate the public will for the sake of individual property and national survival and development, and use a national referendum to unambiguously let China know what road Taiwan will take in the future.
We also hope that the blue camp, with its opposing view, will be able to take the same position as the majority of the people, and listen carefully to the voice of the people instead of continuing to support China's lies and fawn on China. We must not allow 23 million Taiwanese to miss this opportunity to express their wishes.
Translated by Jackie Lin, Eddy Chang, and 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