Amid both fierce debate over the APEC summit and pre-election fever, the ruling DPP quietly held its national congress in Kaohsiung on Oct. 20. There it engaged in the most vigorous clarification of the party line since the DPP charter was amended on Oct. 31, 1991.
Article One of the DPP charter calls for a "sovereign and independent Republic of Taiwan." At the 1991 national congress, through a push by some of the DPP's more pragmatic members, this article was amended to read: "Based on the fundamental rights of the people, the establishment of a sovereign Taiwan Republic and the formation of a new constitution shall be determined by all citizens of Taiwan through a national referendum."
Clearly, "referendum" is a necessary step in the establishment of a Republic of Taiwan. Though many people use neutral language to refer to this article in the DPP charter, calling it the "referendum clause" (
In the 1990s, the "Taiwan independence clause" consolidated the pro-independence vote during elections. But as the DPP's ambition to become the ruling party grew, most of the party elite discovered that the unification-independence spectrum had become more evenly split. In fact, the "Taiwan independence clause" had become a curse threatening the DPP's efforts to cross the political threshold.
After 1995, the clause gradually became a decorative ornament as successive party chairpersons proclaimed that, "Even if the DPP takes power, it will not declare independence." Amending the platform also became a headache at every DPP national congress.
"Taiwan independence," however, had been the DPP's totem since its establishment in 1986. To many DPP supporters who viewed their hope for Taiwan independence as the only issue that mattered to them, scrapping the "Taiwan independence clause" was tantamount to destroying the party's soul. To preserve the article as a keepsake on the one hand, and to make substantial amendments to the platform that would pave the way for the DPP's accession to power on the other hand, the national congress passed on May 8, 1999 -- rather creatively -- a resolution regarding Taiwan's future.
This resolution clearly stated: "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent country. Any change in the independent status quo must be decided by all the residents of Taiwan by means of a plebiscite." This significant amendment caused the DPP to move towards the political center. It also formed the basis for the DPP's China policy white paper, and for the "New Middle Way" line in last year's presidential campaign.
The DPP used these changes to inform the world that it had already become a political party committed to maintaining the status quo, and that the "Taiwan independence clause" existed in name only. Even so, because the platform was still held in such an exalted position, the DPP's "New Middle Way" was still called into question by other political parties, business circles, China and the international community during the presidential election.
Actually, the cross-strait policies of Chen Shui-bian's (
Still, impressions of the DPP as the "Taiwan independence party" are deeply embedded in Taiwanese minds -- in the same way as the New Party is known as a "mainlander" party and the KMT as a "black gold" party.
Only time will tell whether or not the DPP's raising the status of the resolution on Taiwan's future to the level of the "Taiwan independence clause" -- and taking substantive actions towards having the clause put aside -- will dispel those impressions. But at least the DPP can gauge whether the TAIEX will rise, and whether the public anxieties about Taiwan independence have truly been dispelled. In addition, the DPP can observe whether the move will cause the People's Republic of China to be friendlier towards Taiwan, and whether it has been beneficial to cross-strait relations.
Perhaps former president Lee Teng-hui (
The Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) could fill that pro-independence gap. Once the TSU forms an alliance with the DPP -- and speaks out for Taiwanese sovereignty -- the DPP will have even less to worry about. It will be better able to take practical action to attract centrist voters. If the TSU is really thinking of helping the DPP, apart from chasing the KMT into the unification camp, perhaps it should also begin to fiercely criticize the DPP from the perspective of an independence faction, effectively pushing the DPP toward the political center.
Joseph Wu is Deputy Director of the Institute of International Relations at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Scudder Smith
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
An American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) spokesperson on Saturday rebuked a Chinese official for mischaracterizing World War II-era agreements as proving that Taiwan was ceded to China. The US Department of State later affirmed that the AIT remarks reflect Washington’s long-standing position: Taiwan’s political status remains undetermined and should only be resolved peacefully. The US would continue supporting Taiwan against military, economic, legal and diplomatic pressure from China, and opposes any unilateral attempt to alter the “status quo,” particularly through coercion or force, the United Daily News cited the department as saying. The remarks followed Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman recently sat down for an interview with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson in which he openly acknowledged that ChatGPT’s model behavior is indeed influencing the entire world, and that he himself is responsible for the decisions related to the bot’s moral framework. He said that he has not had a good night of sleep since its launch, as the technology could bring about unpredictable consequences. Although the discussion took place in the US, it is closely related to Taiwan. While Altman worries about the concentration of power, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has already weaponized artificial