In their decades-long political struggle, the Taiwanese have made great strides in gaining freedom and democracy. The time has come now for their push to claim once and for all the full right of self-determination. The means to the end is, of course, referendums. The past offers a preview of the future.
In his 14-point address to the US Congress in January 1918, President Woodrow Wilson introduced the groundbreaking concept of self-determination. After World War I, the principle of self-determination was to become the guiding light for people under autocratic and alien rule.
The Allies' military victory over the Central Powers and the subsequent Versailles Peace Treaty, that was based very much on Wilson's 14 Points, led the defeat of Imperial Germany and the autocratic Austrian-Hungarian and Ottoman empires were broken up and most subjugated ethnic minority groups were allowed independence on the basis of self-determination in the next decade or two.
The principle and practice of self-determination have become so widely accepted as a fundamental right of all peoples that after World War II it was written into the charter of the UN. As a result, with the exception of a few cases most colonial powers fairly rapidly, one after another, ended their colonial rule and allowed independence to their former colonies.
The collapse of communism in Eastern Europe in late 1980s and the slackening of East-West Cold-War tensions prefigured the dismemberment of both the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. Over ten former Soviet republics became independent, sovereign nation-states by the end of 1991. Compared with the relatively peaceful break-up of the Soviet Union, that of Yugoslavia was violent, but four breakaway republics, Macedonia, Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia, did eventually become independent.
Finally, the UN has also played a role in making independence possible in a few cases. The most recent case is East Timor, which had been forcefully annexed by Indonesia in 1976. After over two decades of struggle for self-determination, the East Timorese were finally allowed on Aug. 30, 1999 to vote whether to remain as part of Indonesia or declare independence. In the UN-monitored plebiscite, more than 78 percent of those who cast their votes chose to break with Indonesia. On May 20, 2002, East Timor officially became the first new country of the 21st century.
As discussed, the century after 1918 is to a great extent a century of nation-states founded on the Wilsonian principle of self-determination. Now let's turn our attention to the case of Taiwan.
Taiwan was a Japanese colony from 1895, when China ceded the island to Japan, to 1945, when the defeated Japan surrendered to the Allies. From 1945 to 1952, Taiwan was a Japanese territory under the Allied military occupation. The former supreme commander of the Allied forces in the Pacific theater former general Douglas MacArthur, however, had assigned the task of actual occupation of Taiwan to the Chiang Kai-shek-led (
Since 1952, the status of Taiwan had thus remained undecided. It must be settled by peaceful means and based upon the principle of self-determination as prescribed in the charter of the UN. In 1987 the Chiang-imposed martial rule came to an end and democracy had its beginning when a native-born Taiwanese -- Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) -- succeeded the presidency in 1988. Then in 1996, the people of Taiwan exercised their right of self-determination by directly electing Lee their president.
By most international standards, Taiwan is an independent and sovereign nation. The PRC's attempt to annex Taiwan is no different from Hitler Germany's Anschluss plan, which ultimately resulted in the annexation of Austria in 1938. Before the forced annexation, Hitler had prevented the implementation of then-Austrian chancellor Schuschnigg's plan for a national plebiscite to decide in favor of Austrian independence. It was only with the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 that Austria was liberated to become an independent, sovereign nation again.
Beijing's "one country, two systems" formula is indeed a sugarcoated version of Hitler's plan to annex Austria.
The widespread discontent in Hong Kong was fully demonstrated in the July 1 protest. Hong Kong is ready for wider democracy while the Beijing appointed Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (
The people of Hong Kong are faring a lot worse today than before the Chinese takeover. Clearly, the Taiwanese are aware of the worsening development in Hong Kong. How can China's offer of the same "one country, two systems" formula have any appeal to the Taiwanese? In fact, public opinion polls in the island nation have shown that over 70 percent of the Taiwanese asked have rejected China's annexation formula for Taiwan.
The people of Taiwan have the right to choose their own destiny. What better means for making known their decision is there than a national plebiscite? Taiwan must soon pass a national referendum law so that the people can directly participate in the decision of their nation's major policies, including Taiwan's relations with China. It is the legal as well as moral obligation of "the people of the United Nations," in the words of the UN Charter Preamble, to support the freedom-loving Taiwanese in exercising the UN-guaranteed right of self-determination.
Ching-chih Chen is a Professor Emeritus of History at Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville and a member of North America Taiwanese Professors' Association
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