On the eve of the vote on the Referendum Law (
Zhang said that China understands the desire of people in Taiwan for democracy and autonomy, but if a referendum law was enacted that lacked "restrictions" with respect to the issues of national flag, name and territory, and that provided a legal basis for a declaration of Taiwanese independence, then "we will without question react strongly."
He went on to remark that "China will not sit idly by as President Chen Shui-bian (
The ruling and opposition camps went into battle over the referendum issue on Thursday, each endorsing a different version of the law.
Zhang's decision to issue such a stern threat just before the referendum duel was an effort to sway those who were less than determined to uphold the referendum right of the people, and to interfere with the passage of the law by dividing and conquering.
However, in view of the fact that China's threats against Taiwan have often incited resentment among Taiwanese and have helped the growth of Taiwanese consciousness, it was no surprise that Zhang's conduct not only failed to accomplish its intended effect, but may have fostered unanimity among the people, facilitating passage of the Referendum Law.
In the past, in the face of threats from China, people in Taiwan did not react with unity. Some politicians even used Chinese threats of war to coerce their countrymen. However, politicians and parties that betrayed the mainstream popular will in this way were rejected by the people in the end, and became gradually marginalized.
Therefore, in this battle over the referendum issue, some politicians and political parties finally grasped reality, and did not dare, for once, to ignore the popular will. They drastically altered their position overnight -- literally.
With their condescending remarks about proponents of a new constitution -- such as "ignorant" and "nonsense" -- still fresh in people's minds, they managed not only to propose a timetable for drafting a new constitution, but also proposed a referendum law with no restrictions attached. This change among certain parties and politicians was perhaps the result of election considerations, and not the result of genuine ideological change.
However, in the face of Zhang's criticisms, both the opposition and ruling camps reacted with a unified response.
Not only did the pan-green camp ask China to understand that the right to referendum is a fundamental political right of the people, but the pan-blues loudly criticized China for inappropriate behavior.
They even said that "the Republic of China [ROC] is an independent sovereign country and no foreign power should interfere with the ROC's legislative process."
This response suggests that China is being perceived as a "foreign power." Under the circumstances, such military threats -- which have never accomplished their intended purpose to begin with -- are not likely to accomplish anything this time around.
Frankly speaking, China is right in observing that, propelled by democracy, Taiwan is drifting further and further from China.
In 1949, the People's Republic of China was officially established. The ROC had been vanquished. The remnant Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) forces that moved to Taiwan were simply an alien regime that planned to use Taiwan as a stepping stone to retake China.
In the era after martial law, media censorship was lifted and organizing political parties was no longer prohibited. As a result of democratization and nativization campaigns in Taiwan, the government changed from an "alien" regime into a "local" regime. Thereafter, a sovereign country took shape.
Now that Taiwan has left behind the civil war between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party, it no longer has anything to do with China. Regardless of how linked the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are in terms of language, history, and culture, now both sides must face up to the reality of "one China, minus Taiwan."
If China is unwilling to face the reality of "one country on each side (of the Taiwan Strait)," and if it refuses to facilitate a harmonious and stable cross-strait relationship in a rational and peaceful manner, and instead continues to attempt to trap Taiwan with "one China," disaster will surely ensue. Including a referendum right in the Constitution is a very important reform project. Although Taiwan is an independent country, the Constitution was brought from China by the KMT. From structure to ideology to operating mechanisms, from flag to name to territory, all elements of the Constitution are built on the concept of "Great China," and are completely at odds with the current environment in Taiwan.
Though the Constitution has been amended six times, these amendments were piecemeal measures, and none succeeded in resolving the problems with the Constitution. Instead, they highlighted how broken the Constitution was, and showed an urgent need for a total reworking.
Representative democracy can longer satisfy all the country's practical needs. Some disputes in public affairs -- from national identity to local development -- require a referendum system, so as to solicit the opinion of the public and put an end to disputes.
Therefore, referendums and a new constitution have become necessary for the deepening of Taiwan's democracy and sovereignty, and for making Taiwan a "normal country."
Not only is China a totalitarian country, but its leaders are especially good at manipulating and inflaming nationalism. If a referendum right and a new constitution in Taiwan create cross-strait polarization, this is not Taiwan's fault.
Instead, it is because China is too obsessed with the concept of "one China," and incapable of digging itself out of that hole.
Recently the Chinese government has launched another wave of verbal attacks against Taiwan. From Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's (
We must solemnly inform the Chinese government that the passage of Referendum Law and the writing of a new constitution are the internal affairs of Taiwan. China is simply Taiwan's neighbor, and has no say so in any of these things.
Resorting to insults and threats will accomplish nothing, but instead will show China's true colors to the world. It will also create irreparable gaps between the people of the two sides. China and Taiwan will simply drift further apart, and this will harm the chances to resolve differences and misunderstandings in the future.
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
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
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