A theory has emerged in discussion on cross-strait relations, which claims that the whole problem has nothing to do with China and is really all President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) fault.
Advocates of this theory say that the result of the recent legislative elections, in which the pan-blue camp held on to its majority, was a great relief to both the US and China, for the pan-blue camp was seen as a balancing force in the legislature, preventing the pan-green camp from going too far with calls for changing the national title and constitutional re-engineering. Looked at in this light, it would not be far-fetched to say that the pan-blue camp's ability to hold on to its majority was the result of international pressure.
But the pan-blue camp's so-called victory was shown to be totally hollow when People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (
That's why Taiwan should protect itself on the legal front and pass an "anti-annexation law," which should, on the premise that Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation, concern itself with any action that seeks to infringe on or reduce its current level of sovereignty. For example, the legislature should establish a system of levels of military threat, so that if the number of missiles targeting Taiwan exceeds a certain level, or if China uses some other method to strike Taiwan militarily, then this would trigger a red alert for annexation, and would immediately activate measures outlined in the "anti-annexation law."
A threat to Taiwan's sovereignty might not necessarily take a military form, for there is also the problem of Taiwan's isolation and marginalization on the international scene. As Beijing is poaching Taiwan's diplomatic allies, the "anti-annexation law" should provide for a minimum threshold of allies. If the number of allies falls below the threshold, then Taiwan's freedom to participate in international organizations and maneuver on the international stage will have reached a point so compromised that the provisions of the "anti-annexation law" should be activated.
Drawing red lines that others cannot cross should not be the preserve of the Americans and the Chinese. They should not always be the ones holding us by the throat and telling us that we are making trouble. Taiwan should also draw its own red line beyond which its survival is threatened. When this red line is crossed, then Taiwan is in danger of being annexed, and as a nation, it should use every method at its disposal to protect itself.
As to the actual provisions that would come into force as part of this law, these would have three levels. First would be persuasion. A legislative process would take effect and legislators would establish that the red line for Taiwan's survival had indeed been crossed and we would seek international recognition of this fact. On the legal front, we need to expand the provisions for a defensive referendum under the Referendum Law as a public defense mechanism against annexation. The third level is psychological preparation of the public: a social, economic and cultural early-warning system. Through the provision of information serving as the foundation of a social education program, the public will become increasingly aware of any changes to the status of Taiwan's sovereignty.
An "anti-annexation law" would transcend the issue of unification or independence, for its premise would be that Taiwan is currently a sovereign nation, and whether it eventually unifies with China is not something with which it would be concerned. The main purpose of the law would be the preservation of Taiwan's current sovereign status, so that the international community does not fall victim to the misconception that Taiwan is in any way seeking to change the status quo or forget the fact that Beijing is pushing forward relentlessly to counterbalance the passive role that Taiwan plays within the scope of the US Taiwan Relations Act.
This is the first challenge that must be faced by the new legislature in which the pan-green camp does not have a majority. It is not a question of which party has the right to form a government, nor how the positions of premier and vice premier will be allocated, but simply a question of how a new legislature, representing recent public opinion, is going to protect Taiwan's sovereignty.
The question is what kind of "anti-annexation law" we need in order to counter Beijing's use of the law as a means of annexing Taiwan. This is something that the pan-blue camp also needs to respond to as a matter of urgency. The pan-blue camp's tactics of frightening the public into believing there would be a war if the pan-green camp won a legislative majority were fine as a campaign strategy. But now that Taiwan is faced with the pressure that China can bring to bear through its anti-secession law, the pan-blue camp and its leaders must make their position clear about whether they think it is necessary to protect Taiwan's sovereignty. If this is not made clear, fighting over who gets to form a government is simply meaningless.
This is really the question the people of Taiwan are concerned about. Whoever can get the work done that is required for responding to the threat of China's anti-secession law will be the main force within the new legislature and will grab the initiative within the new political environment. We must avoid letting the other side make an incorrect judgement and believe that the people of Taiwan are uncertain about Taiwan's identity, and that Taiwan's leaders are hesitant to protect the country's sovereignty.
Hsu Yung-ming is an assistant research fellow at the Sun Yat-sen Institute for Social Sciences and Philosophy at Academia Sinica.
TRANSLATED BY Ian Bartholomew
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS