The pan-blue camp, which has opposed all efforts to pass a law authorizing referendums, recently made an abrupt U-turn and vowed to pass such a law. It also demanded that the DPP clarify whether such a law should allow for a referendum on the unification-independence issue. Caught flat-footed, the DPP appears to have turned conservative and made a U-turn of its own, saying such an issue should not be put to a referendum, thereby falling into the unification camp's trap.
We do not intend to study the motive behind the pan-blue camp's change of heart. Its show of support for a referendum law should be applauded, no matter what its intentions. What is important is the direction of history and the development of democracy. All the fuss about what kind of questions could be asked is simply an attempt to delay passage of a referendum law.
The three years of the DPP's minority government has made clear the practical need for referendums. China's political bullying of Taiwan and its deceptive ploys with "one country, two systems" in Hong Kong are prime examples of why referendums are necessary. For three years, President Chen Shui-bian's (
Once a referendum bill passes, the government will be able to bypass the Legislative Yuan once a bill it believes to have strong public support is blocked on the legislative floor. The matter can be put directly to a referendum and public support can be sought directly. This will counter partisan wrangling. Such a design will benefit all parties because any one of them could one day be voted into power. Political leaders with any foresight should be able to see this.
In terms of what the law should entail, direct expression of the public will is the spirit of referendums. The country's status is the main anxiety of the people of Taiwan. If they cannot express their will directly and democratically regarding their status -- if they are only allowed to express their opinion on trivial matters -- then referendums will count for little.
There are many ways for nations to pursue independence. The Americans gained independence from Britain through war. Mongolia expressed its wish for independence via a referendum and then proceeded to declare independence. Taiwan does not have to emulate Mongolia, nor does it have to decide on the unification-independence issue through a referendum. However, the people should have the right to hold referendums, including one on independence. Whether or not such a question will ever be put to a referendum depends on the status of cross-strait
interaction.
If any reminder were needed about how frustrated people become when they feel they lack a voice in government, the massive turnout in Hong Kong on Tuesday came just in time. Tuesday was the sixth anniversary of Hong Kong's handover to Chinese rule -- and the people of the territory marked it with a gigantic demonstration against the anti-subversion legislation that their government plans to enact. Unfortunately for the people of Hong Kong, it is unlikely their leaders will alter their plans.
But it is not too late for the people of Taiwan. Hopefully the legislature will quickly pass a law authorizing referendums. That does not mean one should be held right away. After all, referendums are extremely costly, in terms of time, money and the political tensions they inspire. They ought not be undertaken lightly.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations