Taiwan is in trouble with the US, whose support is absolutely essential to the survival of the nation.
The first sign of trouble came last December when US President George W. Bush, after meeting with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (
In a recent congressional hearing, US Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly was even more blunt, warning that Taiwan risked losing US support if Chen changed the status quo through amending the Constitution. In Taiwan, David Keegan, deputy director of the American Institute in Taiwan, called on A-bian (
Is Washington conspiring with Beijing to force Taiwan into compliance with the "one China" formula in the name of preserving the "status quo?" Perhaps not. But one thing is certain: China has succeeded in weakening the US' resolve to protect Taiwan by taking advantage of the US' preoccupation with wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the fight against international terrorism. The US needs China's assistance in reigning in North Korea's nuclear ambitions. The US must also remain mindful of its booming trade with and investment in China, on which US consumers and corporations heavily depend. Those factors are reason enough for the Bush administration to want to accommodate China on Taiwan.
How can the A-bian administration keep Taiwan from one day finding itself with no choice but to begin negotiating with Beijing on the basis of "one China" or a variation of it?
A-bian should hold a referendum as soon as possible and ask his people a simple and straightforward question: Do you favor the unification of Taiwan with China?
Such a referendum should proceed with or without the US' support. In fact, the US has no reason to object to it, because it is not designed to change the status quo. On the contrary, if a large majority of Taiwanese should reject unification, as is expected, the referendum would reinforce the status quo. While China uses the status quo to prevent Taiwan from drifting toward independence, Taiwan can use the same status quo to dissuade China from using force. Additionally, a resounding vote against unification would send a powerful message to the world that unification is not an option for Taiwanese people.
Such a referendum would provide A-bian with a strong mandate to undertake the constitutional overhaul he has promised. The small margin by which he won re-election hardly constitutes a mandate for carrying out a revision of the fundamental law of the land.
The March 20 referendums failed because the two items on which the people were asked to vote (missile defense and negotiation with China) clearly fall within the domain of executive decisions.
This allowed the pan-blue camp to label the referendums an "election gambit." In contrast, voting for or against unification is a question of fundamental concern to all the people of Taiwan, regardless of their political inclinations or ethnic affiliations. If skillfully handled, the referendum could pave the way for ethnic harmony by providing people with political common ground.
Finally, by carrying out such a referendum, A-bian could help Taiwanese realize their century-old dream of self-determination.
In the past 110 years, decisions have been made on several occasions which affected the sovereignty of Taiwan: the Treaty of Shimonoseki (1895), the Cairo Declaration (1943), the San Francisco Peace Treaty (1951), the Shanghai Communique (1972) and the US' recognition of the People's Republic of China (1979). Not in a single instance were the Taiwanese people ever consulted.
Today, Taiwanese control their own government. It is up to the A-bian administration to give the people a chance to exercise their right of self-determination. Let them clearly say yes or no to unification.
For Taiwan to continue to survive as a free, democratic and prosperous society, it has to break the "one-China" spell cast by Beijing and subscribed to by Washington.
But before Taiwan can ask the US to change its stance, Taiwan must demonstrate that good reasons for change exist. An overwhelming vote against unification could be a first step toward a review of the US's "one China" policy.
Caveat: For such a referendum to be effective, 65 percent to 75 percent of eligible voters must vote against unification. To achieve this result, careful preparation and skillful communication with all political groups are essential. Enlisting the support of those working for the rectification of Taiwan's name -- a movement led by former president Lee Teng-hui (
Edward Chen is professor emeritus of history residing in Edinboro, Pennsylvania. E-mail: edchen@velocity.net
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS