An independent country, especially a democratic one, has the right to hold referendums to decide major national policies. This is not only a right but a duty -- a "universal value" recognized by the people of the world, especially those of the world's democratic nations.
Therefore, it is the most basic democratic right of the Taiwanese people to hold a "defensive referendum." No other countries, including China, Japan or the US, have a greater say on the matter. But China is using every possible means to shrink Taiwan's international space, pressuring Japan, the US and other European countries by claiming that President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) is promoting Taiwan's independence and changing the status quo in the Taiwan Strait. As a result, Japan, the US and most recently France have expressed their concern to Taiwan, and have even opposed Taiwan holding a referendum in March.
These developments are in fact part of the normal operation of international politics. Each country's attitude has complex dimensions and can be interpreted differently. This is not something worthy of panic. From Taiwan's perspective, Chen has his views on how to rule the nation, as well as to what degree Taiwan should resist pressure from China, Japan and the US. All of this is open to public scrutiny.
But in view of China's behavior, if a nation were a normal and independent sovereign state, its people would unite to resist China's hegemonic bent and protest against the interference of Japan, the US and other countries in its domestic affairs.
Unfortunately, Taiwan is an abnormal country. Chen and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
Remember the absurd moment when Lien compared Chen to Osama bin Laden, the guru of international terrorism? Chen is holding a defensive referendum, and claims that the presidential election is in fact "a sacred battle between the Taiwanese people and the Chinese Communist Party." This statement was absolutely legitimate. But Lien seems to believe that Chen's "sacred battle" statement was in the same vein as bin Laden's terrorism agenda, and said that the president could go right ahead if he wanted to die, and that he wasn't interested in going to war alongside the president.
Chen is holding a preventive referendum to demand China cease threatening Taiwan with its ballistic missiles. China is in fact the real al-Qaeda, and Chinese President Hu Jintao (
These remarks were not only stunning in their shamelessness but also frightening to many Taiwanese people. With an opposition presidential candidate blathering on in this capitulationist vein, does Taiwan really need China for an enemy?
People First Party (PFP) Chair-man James Soong (宋楚瑜) has also been a champion of capitulationism. He is both unwilling and unable to maintain Taiwan's sovereignty, and is singing the nation's demise. He recently mimicked and even exaggerated the concerns of Japan, the US and other countries. Not only did he lobby the blue camp to prevent the launch of referendums on the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant and other issues at the Legislative Yuan, and called on Chen to give up his defensive referendum, he also claimed that "no nation in the world can afford to irritate China." His remarks were stunning and frightening. I can't help but wonder whether Soong is running for the vice presidency of China.
Irritate China? Taiwan's efforts to maintain its sovereignty over the past 50 years have irritated China. The US' "three communiques" based on its "one-China" policy and the Taiwan Relations Act have irritated China. Washington letting Chen and Vice President Annette Lu (
The European Parliament passed a resolution recently demanding Beijing not wage war across the Strait and withdraw its missiles; this irritated China. India's development of nuclear weapons has irritated China. Former Japanese prime minister Yoshiro Mori visited Taiwan last month and irritated China. It must be a sign of the apocalypse if all these democratic countries dare irritate China.
In a word, both Lien and Soong have divested themselves of any dignity. They dare not support the international status of the nation. Will Taiwan remain a democratic and independent sovereignty in the future if this pair is elected? I really don't think so.
Hopefully, the Taiwanese people can see through this on March 20. They must use their ballots to recognize and maintain the sovereignty of Taiwan.
Chiou Chwei-liang is a visiting professor at the Graduate Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Tamkang University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS