The Taiwan Professors Association (TPA) unveiled a draft "Constitution of the Republic of Taiwan" on Sunday. The draft suggests changing Taiwan's name from the Republic of China (ROC) to the Republic of Taiwan (ROT). It also suggests that we shrink the nation's territory to Taiwan and Penghu. As for Kinmen and Matsu, it suggests we grant residents of those islands the right of self-determination, so they can decide to declare independence, or to unify with Taiwan or China.
A group of professors with a strong local consciousness established the association in Taipei 14 years ago, when Taiwan was under the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) authoritarian rule. The group's members are from colleges and universities across the country. They were pioneers in Taiwan's democratization. From the abolishment of the National Assembly, establishment of direct presidential elections, the withdrawal of political and military forces from the media, to legislative reforms and other major issues, they have often taken the lead and roused the public through demonstrations, sit-ins and other activities. They have criticized unreasonable systems and lent their support to far reaching political reforms.
The Constitution is unsuitable in the present day. When it was written in China, Taiwan was still part of Japan. Representatives of the people of Taiwan never participated in the drawing up of the document. The KMT no longer rules China or Taiwan and the UN recognizes the People's Republic of China as the legitimate government of China. Yet the ROC Constitution states that its territory still includes all of the PRC as well as Mongolia. It is preposterous not to change the Constitution.
Taiwan's chaotic political situation stems mainly from the political parties' differences over national recognition and the scope of national territory. The TPA's assertion that the territorial issue should be settled through referendums and the writing of a new constitution that gives the people of Kinmen and Matsu the right to decide their own fate is worth supporting. Such a move would help end the internecine fighting in the legislature and in society.
But there are other important issues that must also be addressed: Whether to adopt a three-branch or five-branch government structure and whether to adopt a presidential system, a cabinet system or a dual-executive system. In order to ensure peace and security for future generations, Taiwan needs to re-engineer or at least make large-scale amendments to the Constitution to clarify these issues.
Both local and foreign constitutional experts as well as experts in legal and political affairs should be called in to assist in formulating a new constitution that meets the needs of a modern Taiwan. As to the debate over whether Taiwan needs to change its national title or its national flag, these are questions that can eventually be resolved by referendum.
But before embarking on the effort to overhaul the Constitution, the government must make it clear to the international community that such a move is absolutely necessary for Taiwan's continued survival and development. Without a new constitution, Taiwan will have no future, for internal conflicts will increase until they damage the nation's economic prospects.
Both the US and China should accept that the mainstream consensus within Taiwan is for a new constitution, for it is the natural result of democratization. It is not intended as a threat or an expression of enmity toward anyone.
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