History takes place when we are not watching. For the whole world to see, four consecutive Saturdays -- the 228 Hand-in-hand Rally on Feb. 28, the 313 Rally on March 13, the presidential election on March 20 and the big pan-blue demonstration on March 27 -- have thoroughly changed the fate of Taiwan and the future of all Chinese.
For pan-blue and pan-green supporters, this has been a peaceful revolution, a revolution where the people of Taiwan have decided their own future. "Fear" was what set off this profoundly moving revolution. One side feared "independence" and the other "unification." Then, due to the dramatic result, 23 million Taiwanese were instantly swept away in a frenzy of rallies.
Although many people are still anxious, worrying over whether the nation will become divided, blue and green supporters in fact need worry no more after this total mobilization of the public.
This has been an excellent example of public mobilization. The people have learned how to express their wishes through peaceful gatherings, and how to use the international media to make their voice heard throughout the world. It has been an unprecedented exercise and, without knowing it, the people have relied on their own intelligence and peaceful demeanor to achieve a revolution.
From another perspective, after watching the presidential election, the Beijing government must understand that an anti-democratic, violent "liberation" of Taiwan by military force will run into the concerted opposition of 23 million Taiwanese, despite China's strong military and almost 500 ballistic missiles aimed at Taiwan. The possibility of China "liberating" Taiwan by military force is now non-existent.
The rallies have also done away with the possibility of the "one country, two systems" policy being accepted here, the many shortcomings of which were revealed long ago.
Very few Taiwanese know that the "one country, two systems" policy celebrates its 20th anniversary this year. On June 22, 1984, when then Chinese paramount leader Deng Xiaoping (
However, less than seven years have passed since Hong Kong's return to China, and not only has the "one country, two systems" policy failed to induce a Taiwanese capitulation, it is also being seriously challenged in Hong Kong. On June 1 last year, an unprecedented 500,000 people took to the streets of Hong Kong, demanding the replacement of Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (
During the fervor surrounding Taiwan's presidential election, a meeting of the standing committee of China's National People's Congress decided to interpret articles in Hong Kong's Basic Law dealing with the change of chief executive and the creation of the Legislative Council. The aim was to silence Hong Kong calls for chief executive and Legislative Council general elections, and to warn the people of the territory that they cannot walk down the road of Taiwanese-style democracy.
This action clearly reveals that a "Hong Kong ruled by Hong Kong people" is a birdcage autonomy restricted to mundane matters of daily life.
It is not unexpected that the "one country, two systems" policy has reached a dead end after 20 years. Deng indeed had a vision 20 years ago. Regarding the two incompatible systems -- socialism and capitalism -- Deng said that "this means that within the People's Republic of China, the mainland with its 1 billion people will maintain the socialist system, while Hong Kong and Taiwan continue under the capitalist system."
The differences between Taiwan, Hong Kong and China have long been transferred to the two "new systems," "democracy" and "centralized authoritarianism."
Faced with Taiwan's latest presidential election and seeing the democratic force of the collectively mobilized Taiwanese public, former Chinese president Jiang Zemin (
The people of Taiwan have written democratic history. The March election involving almost 13 million people may change the future of 1.3 billion Chinese.
Ku Lai is a political commentator.
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