After the 2000 presidential election, former president Lee Teng-hui (
After the KMT and PFP became allies, for both this year's presidential election and the upcoming legislative elections, the pan-blue camp has attempted to focus on issues related to the public's livelihood or the government's achievements while campaigning. However, the direction of Taiwan's political situation mostly focuses on our national status. The issues of whether to amend the Constitution or create a new one, the question of the national emblem and title, and criticism of the KMT's outdated party-state ideology have dominated the campaign. This has gradually become the public consensus.
The pan-blue camp proposes maintaining the status quo, saying that the Republic of China (ROC) is an independent sovereign state, so it is unnecessary to rectify the nation's name. This will both maintain the government's legitimacy and avoid irritating China or triggering a war in the Taiwan Strait.
These statements are not groundless. They are based on realistic considerations and profound historical and cultural motivations. The problem is this: Ever since the early 1990s, a pattern has emerged in the development of Taiwan's rule of law. Taiwan has repeatedly proven through upholding the processes of Western democracy that the nation is indeed an independent sovereign state. Through successive democratic elections, Lee and Chen's administrations have firmly demonstrated our existence.
In my opinion, the mainstream opinion in Taiwan is neither to maintain the status quo nor boost the economy, as the pan-blue camp claims. It is impossible for Taiwan to accept the status quo of not being recognized as a nation. In particular, whether you like them or not, and whether you agree or not, Taiwan's constitutional reforms, especially those in the 1990s, were accomplished through democratic procedures.
Of course, this does not mean that the pan-green camp's accusation that the pan-blue camp is using China's military threat as a campaign trick to scare the Taiwanese people is true. The myth of Chinese nationalism has not yet been broken, and it serves as an emotional basis for a unification by force. This can't be resolved simply by telling the public not to be afraid. Those in power, if they are responsible enough, should be extremely cautious about any possible tragedy caused by irrational factors.
As voters, the only value that we must safeguard is respect for decisions made through democratic procedures. After Taiwan's democratization process over the past half a century, we should certainly clear away accumulated anti-democratic sediment so as to improve the quality of democracy.
We are now in the last phase of our transformation. No matter how the pan-blue and pan-green camps attack each other, both sides believe in democracy and Taiwan's status as an independent sovereign state. Obviously, our problem is external recognition, not internal awareness. How to avoid internal confrontation is the biggest challenge to our democracy at present. Since politicians are so unreliable, we can only hope that voters will act in a mature fashion.
Sun Ta-chuan is the director of the Graduate Institute of Ethnic Development at Donghua University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
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