The reactions to President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) statement last Sunday about pushing for a new constitution are worthy of re-examination.
Outside the country, both the US and China have been relatively controlled and cautious. For Beijing authorities, who are given to outlandish denouncements of anything that smacks of independence, this was a surprise. Here at home, the pan-blue alliance appears somewhat disappointed that the whole thing did not escalate into a greater controversy.
The statement by US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher the day after Chen's talk -- that the US did not want to comment on an election campaign statement -- demonstrated primarily a determination on the part of the US government to maintain a hands-off posture toward the domestic politics of Taiwan. With the next presidential election approaching rapidly, the US obviously hopes to refrain from giving the impression of siding with any particular political party or candidate.
Still, some local pro-China media and politicians said that Boucher's talk had a condescending tone and that his underlying message was that Chen's announcement was a mere campaign gimmick -- not to be taken seriously.
It is certainly appropriate to characterize Chen's remarks as part of his "campaign platform," as they depict a goal he has set or a promise he has made to the voters about what is to be accomplished once he is re-elected. It is hard to understand why that characterization, by itself, is a negative one.
After all, all candidates must have campaign platforms. Otherwise, how would the voters be able to decide for whom to cast their votes? KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) have campaign platforms too.
Of course in Taiwan, most politicians have been unable to live up to even half of their campaign promises after they are elected. Sometimes this inability reflects the irresponsibility of the politicians who simply become too preoccupied with other matters, such as looking after their own interests. Sometimes the failure to deliver on promises is a result of being held back by political obstacles.
What matters is whether these politicians had the best interests of the people and the country in mind when they made the promises and whether they were sincere about living up to their pledges after being elected.
We believe that Chen's pledge is both sincere and in the best interests of the nation. It is both unfair and premature of the pro-China camp to accuse Chen of being insincere about implementing changes. After all, in the past three years, he has personally experienced the difficulties created by this handicapped Constitution.
Indeed, very few people could honestly deny the fact that there are serious flaws with the Republic of China Constitution. It was drafted in the 1940s in China, with a view to implementation there. Some of the fundamental problems with the current Constitution seriously impair the operation of the government in Taiwan.
One question that should be asked of the pan-blue forces is this: What do they intend to do with all these problems associated with the current Constitution? Surely, they can't argue that there is nothing wrong with it. And surely, they cannot merely say, as Lien did, that the whole subject is "boring."
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