Tomorrow's "March for Democracy and Peace to Protect Taiwan" in Taipei City was initiated by neither the government nor a political party. It is a public event uniting all of Taiwan's people, regardless of ethnicity, sex, age, place of birth or political affiliation.
DPP Legislator Lin Cho-shui (
The Taipei Society, long a mouthpiece for Taiwan's democratization, has also discouraged Chen and Hsieh from taking a major role in the march. The society believes their participation would change the nature of the rally and undermine its value as a civilian action.
Chen yesterday announced that he would take his family to the rally, but stressed that he will march as one of the crowd and not make any speeches. The rally, which hopes to attract 1 million participants to express their anger over the "Anti-Secession" Law, will therefore include the families of both the president and premier. But their presence will not make the rally a government-organized event. That they will march in silence and not make any public pronouncements is an indication of Taiwan's restraint. That this is the first time that the president will take part in a rally as a part of the crowd, is a forceful gesture, but one that also reflects restraint.
By not usurping the "unofficial" nature of the rally with his official presence, Chen will calm domestic and international concerns. His role in the rally will serve as a compromise.
Over the last few days the Democracy, Peace and Defend Taiwan Alliance (
As the march is in the collective interest of all Taiwanese, it's necessary to show a united front. But the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) instead chose to hold a separate rally last Saturday. Moreover, KMT Deputy Chairman Chiang Pin-kun (
The KMT deserves reproach for putting party interests ahead of the national interest.
Additionally, Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou's (馬英九) refusal to grant permission for the rally -- on security concerns about Ketagalan Boulevard, where the march is to end -- marks yet another political blunder on his part. The Taipei City Government just allowed, last weekend, a march terminating at the very same spot. This is nothing but political game-playing. Even if the scale of this march raises concerns about whether city police can maintain order, Taipei City should simply ask the central government for support.
The international community has responded emphatically to China's enactment of the "Anti-Secession" Law. This gives even more reason for Taiwan to stand up and say "no" to China. Of the options available for Taiwan to respond to China, a protest march is the most direct, but also the one least likely to be perceived as changing the status quo.
The number of participants who join the protest matters. In 2003 Hong Kong, 500,000 people took to the streets to protest legislation based on Article 23 of the territory's Basic Law, shocking Beijing and the international community.
If tomorrow's rally can attract over 1 million people, the expression of public sentiment would be on par with a referendum. But if only a limited number turn out, the international community might mistakenly take this to mean that Taiwan tacitly accepts the "Anti-Secession" Law, and simply sit back to watch developments.
For the benefit of everyone in Taiwan, make your voice heard tomorrow.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US