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.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers